Bob White

The BSA works closely with representatives of the indian culture to keep the use of the indian lore and customs respectful and positive. Throughout the decades the BSA has made many changes in its representation of Am. Indian heritage. There is no reason to think that this consideration and cooperation will not continue in the future.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

In the content of the YP vidoe a question is asked of the panel regarding how often the training should be taken. The response is that the BSA recommends it be revisited at least once in a three year period. However councils has the authority to determine its own requirements, also some activiteis can require that the the training be done within a year of the activity.

Regardless who the charter organization is your liability protection is the same. The BSA protects registered adults as well as the COs regardless of who they are providing they follow the BSA regulations. A yacht club is not better protected than the VFW or any other CO. Your DE needs to become better informed.

Scouting is not about taking kids on trips. To bypass training boys, skipping teaching them to plan, not giving them the opportunity to practice and apply skills, and instead just hiring someoine to 'take them' is not good Boy scouting (No matter how much "fun" you might find it). The personal growth that Boy Scouting builds comes from the planning and learning, Not from just being taken on trips, that's Cub Scouting not Boy Scouting. I think Eamonn's original post was dead on.

I don't know any post where anyone said to dump anyone who was not 100% on target. I am not even sure how you would go about putting a % scale on a volunteers performance. But as Eamonn points out the program is not difficult to learn or follow, but the volunteer has to be willing to learn it, and they have to be willing to follow it or ther is no use in keeping them around. I do not have a low opinion of Scouters. I just wish there were more of them. I have a low opinion of volunteers who only want to wear a uniform and boss children around. They are not "scouters", because they have chosen to either not learn, or not follow, the scouting program, and their is no acceptable excuse for that kind of choice.

"The campout is scheduled for a state park, the troop in one campsite; families, the next one over, just like G2SS says Where does the G2SS say that? Train them, trust them, let them lead. Have these scouts done anything in the past that leads you to believe thay cannot be trusted on this activity? This is "family" camp, parents are present for every scout. The parents are responsible for the entire family, not you. You help provide a program. Let the parents parent their children.

The responsibility to select and approve any leader is in the hands of the CR and CC. While I would hope that they would give the scoutmaster's opinion of an ASM due consideration, it is not the scoutmaster's role to determine who if anyone should be a leader. Give them your complete and honest appraisal but then let the CC and CR do their job.

We cannot refute facts that you refuse to present. The fact is you manufacture untruths to support your complaints. The fact is, what you said you wrote was nowhere in what you posted. Nowhere has any report, other than yours, said that the FBI told the BSA what the charges were BEFORE they had finished their investigation and Smith had already retired. You made it up and then you treated it as fact. You have done that countless times now to support your tantrum over a camp that does not belong to you being sold by the organization that owns it. We get it Okay? We all understand you do not like the BSA, we get that you do not know and have not taken the time to learn the difference betwwen the BSA and the Council and how they function. We get that you don't want the organization that owns the land and is responsible for its management, doing what they think is best. We get that you will say anything in absence of facts, and will make up your own facts if needed to fan the fires of your anger. Wwe all get it.

Mikes 5th point would be my first one. I would not be putting so much energy into enticing scouts I don't have when I could be putting it to use serving the scouts I do have. The best promotional and recruitment tool you have is the enthusiasm of the scouts currently in the unit. If they are having an outstanting scouting expereience then others will come to join.

Bringing up issues is one things, MAKING them up is another. jhnky's arguments are exaggerations of the actual situations. He has repeatedly fictionalized the reports and the magnitude of the issues. He has also failed to show any measurable effect the he claims has resulted from this exaggerated events. It is rumor mongering at it lowest. The BSA is no more or less transparent than any other corporation of its type. Jhnky just doesn't like windows, He gets far more enjoyment from his own imagination. He thinks the BSA is clandestine when actully he has just never been interested in learning about it. The council he lives in is selling a piece of land they own and jhnky is distraught that an entire council doesn't stop and do what he and a few of his friends want them to do. This whole uproar he is hosting over Smith, and membership falsification that was found in about 1% of council charters over several years, is a personal campaign because he thinks it was his camp to do with as he wants. He is not "bringing up issues, he is having a temper tantrum.

"The organization placed him on administrative leave after learning that he was under criminal investigation" Notice that what jhnky wrote and what the article actually said are not the same. No one but jhnky has even suggested that the BSA was informed of the reason for the investigation until AFTER the investigation was completed. As soon as the BSA was informed that Smith was being investigated he was put on leave, while on leave and BEFORE he was charged with ANY crime Smith retired. As jhnky's own article reports at the time Smith was arraigned he was "A former high ranking Scouting executive" jhnky also insists that as soon as the BSA was told Smith was being investigated that he should have been fired. jhnky is as unfamiliar with employment law as he is with scouting. You cannot fire a person because he is being investigated. You can accuse anyone of anything, just because they are being investigated does not insure guilt or that charges will even be filed. What jhnky suggests is totally illegal but he is willing to allow his own personal hunt for vengance on the BSA for selling a camp to not only blind from facts, but he has convinced himself that the search for facts is unnecessary as long as his imagination gives him the story he wants. Ed has also overlooked the fact the Smith retired while on leave BEFORE the charges against him were announced and while the investigation stage was in progress. So at the time that he was charged he was no longer a BSA employee.

To answer Hunt's earlier question "I've yet to hear anybody who thinks poor program delivery at the unit level is the problem explain why that has resulted in an overall loss of memberhip over a period of years. If you think program delivery, on average, is declining, why? Why should today's program delivery by, on average, worse than program delivery 30 years ago?" Because, kids have changed, the program has changed, but adults have not. Many of todays leaders are delivering scouting as they remember it as scouts, or as they think it should be, or as others who are reliving their scouting "chilhood" are teaching them. Fewer leaders are getting trained, fewer are using that training. For the program to work you first have to use the program, and you can see by the posts on this forum that many do not.

REMEMBER jhnky creates his own facts even when they do not appear in his "supporting" material. "below noted that Smith was "placed on leave" by BSA when the FBI informed BSA they were investigating him for distributing child porn" Nowhere does his article state that. In the Walmart case the executives crime against the employer was discovered while he was still employed. His firing negated his retirement just as St. Jeans did. But Smith took retirtrement BEFORE his crime was revealed to his employer. You cannot fire someone who is not an employee. Nowhere has jhnky or anyone shown that the FBI revealed the nature of the crime to anyone until AFTER the investigation was completed and the charges were made. All which took place after Smith took his retirement. The fact that Smith fire St.Jean is indeed ironic but that's all it is. At the time of their employment that was Smith's responsibility. Ironic that it was Smith yes, illegal, no.

if you are the problem do not expect a boy to tell you that when they stop coming.

Hi kudu, I think I read what you wrote pretty clearly. You said that your troop routinely goes canoeing without training. Canoeing on moving water without prior training or planning is one of our Troop's most popular events" You determine if water is dangerous based on what other groups do and how deep the water is rather than on routine safety standards held by the BSA others who are involved in water safety. That's dangerous. That's very dangerous. Investure or welcoming ceremomnies are not the same as iniations. And there are and have beem lots of ceremomies available for such ceremonies in various BSA resources, so if they are "sadly lacking" it is because units didn't do them not because they couldn't or didn't have the scripts. The OA does not have you LEAP OVER FIRES. so that is not a very good comparison. I have een to several different summer camps over the years and none sold squirt guns. I doubt that lazer tag is any different in your area than in any other. How different it might be is irrelevant As a BSA activity it is prohibited period. I enjoy laser tag. My son and I have gone a few times. He has gone with his friends, we just don't go as a scout activity. It's the BSA's program they can make what rules they want. None of them are difficult to adhere to. "Yeah, what Venividi wrote :-) Using natural leadership skills, we get all of the new Scouts who are able to swim to earn Canoe and Swimming Merit Badges and thus qualify for canoe trips." But thats not what YOU said. You said "I personally consult the most popular new Scouts before their first-year summer camp and ask them to sign up for these two Merit Badges so that they can participate in the next canoe trip." You didn't mention anything about them motivating others to go, all you said was that you invited the most popular ones to go. There was nothing there to suggest that you meant anything beyond that. Now I would hope that you were not excluding the "less popular" scouts from going, but it sure read that way. Still preparing scouts for an activity based on their popularity does not sound like a very fair or effective way to treat the other scouts, does it? Thanks for listening BW

First let me say that there were no cheap shots thrown by me. The fact is, and anyone who has been on this forum for ANY length of time kows it, that a number of posters have blamed all kinds of things for why scouts have quit the unit (some even in great numbers) yet NO ADULT LEADEER on this forum has ever said "they quit because we have boring meetings". Why boys quit and why their leaders think they quit is not the same. No cheap shots, thats's what has been posted. Non names were given, and to remove that fact simply because you do not enjoy the fact that that is what was posted is not right IMHO. Second, It's not that recruitment is off because scouts aren't inviting friends, its that recruitment could be improved if more boys were invited.

Not only that but what harm could be done if every scout asked at least one other person to join?

Why arent they joining. Two years ago at Philmont Training Center a BSA Director told us of a survey done of several hundred Scout-aged non-scout boys. They were given a survey of various activities and asked to select the ones they were most interested in trying or learning about. Hudreds chose things like rock climbing, canoeing, rafting, snow sports, shooting sports and other scout related activities. Since they were not scouts but were interested in scout stuff the question was asked, What is the #1 you are not in Boy Scouts. Anyone want to guess the #1 answer? It wasn't parents, or policies, or peers, or available time, or sports, or schoolwork. THE #1 ANSWER as to why they weren't scouts... Because no one ever asked them to join. Units that follow the scouting program do not have recruitment or retention problems. (Anchors and Sails!)

What if what he discovers is "hey that was easier than I thought" and so he does it again? If you want more incentives for recruiting...go ahead. You can do that in the unit yourself, you don't need the national office in order to motivate the scouts you serve. I heard about this over a year ago but I have not seen anything official yet that is being put in place. But so what if it is, it is not difficult to teach or do and what could possible be the downside of it? (This message has been edited by Bob White)

#1 This been discussed frequently on this board. There are as usual two schools of thought. One where leaders feel the need to impose quotas, one where it is believed leaders should communicate with individual scouts and help them to make and achieve personal goals. #2 NOWHERE does the BSA program say that this is determined by the scoutmaster IN FACT the Boy Scout Handbook says that the BEST person to judge this is the boy himself. #5 The adult leaders job is to TRAIN junior leaders and help them to learn and practice leadership skills not remove them from office. #6 If the scout has a SM conference then he has completed that requirement. If it is determined that another requirement was not completed then THAT is the one he is recycled on, not the requirement that is done. #7 This is not out of the SM hands. The SM simply isn't a participant DURING the BOR that doesn't mean he or she cannot inform the board of compliments or concerns regarding the scouts developmet prior to the bor beginning. Why would adults want to prove that they have power over other peoples children? Scoutmaster does not mean that you are a master of Scouts.

But making events available to only certain scouts based on their percieved "popularity" rather than on their interests, skills or experience, or more importantly simply because they are members just the same as the "popular" scouts?

Kudu, I will be very straight forward on this. Your unit is a death trap waiting to spring. The fact that it has not killed or seriously injured someone is just a matter of time. If what you post is true then it's not a question of will someone be killed, it is simply a matter of when. One Hour The G2SS is there to protect both the Scout and the BSA from units such as that. It takes about 6 inches of water for a person to drown. Doing ANY outdoor activity without proper training and equipment is dangerous for the participants and irresponsible on the part of the adult leaders. Initiations are FORBIDDEN in the BSA. Teaching scouts to jump over open flames is contrary to everything we teach in scouting about safety. We teach scouts from the time the pick up a BB gun in cubscouts to the time they fire a shotgun in Boy Scouts that you NEVER point a weapon at another person with two exception, law enfoircement and military. Laser tag is no exception (while on a scout activity). If you look at the list of recommended activities you will see that scouting offers plenty of adventure for scouts at appropriate times in their developement and once they have been properly trained. Taking on an adventure such a water activity without training doesn't add more adventure it just increases the opportunity to injure a participant. It's bad scouting and must be avoided. "I personally consult the most popular new Scouts before their first-year summer camp and ask them to sign up for these two Merit Badges so that they can participate in the next canoe trip." Did anyone else find that to be a very unusually statement

"I have to tell you about my troop because it's a requirement for my next rank" Yeech! If that is how the scout is instructed to do it, then the problem is not the requirement but the skills of the leader teaching it.

I think you are asking the WRONG PEOPLE. The poll needs to be addressed by the people who left, not the people who watched them leave. The BSA did such a poll a few years ago and found that while the leader of the units who lost the scouts blamed parents, peers and competing activities, the #1 answer from the boys themselves was "boring meetings". We have seen the same avoidance of personal responsibility from posters here on numerous occassions. Some go so far as to blame activities in other councils for boys not coming to their meetings or even quitting. "The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars but in ourselves." (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

Doing sales as an individual? Doesn't your troopp promote it, explain, distribute the order forms, order stock, plan the money distribution? don't proceeds go to the unit? Thats a unit activity. Read the literature that comes with popcorn material it eve says that sales counts toward advancement. Taking part in troop activities applies to requirement 3 of the First Class Rank. As far as the NEW First Class requirement, it seems harmless enough. The Scout just has to talk to a potential member about scouting. I think teaching boys how to explain to others about the benefits and fun of scouting at an early stage has more pros than cons to it. Of course this means they will need to have good things to say about their Troop's program.