Chisos

Like others have said it's hard to narrow it down to one...but a few would be: (a) The whole crew singing Garth Brooks' "Friends in Low Places" as we hiked into base camp over via the Tooth of Time at Philmont (a bunch of Texas boys, go figure!); (b) At Sea Base, anchored up off Key West, grilling steaks and fresh fish on the boat, and (c) Our wickedly awesome OA Brotherhood Ceremony team.

24 minutes ago, ScouterNorth said:

 

I bet they have Top Men working on this as we speak:  

 

Well, Indy *was* a Boy Scout!

You'll have a great time!  Looking forward to your post-trip report afterwards (to make us all jealous...)

I'm starting to drum up some interest in my unit for a 2020 Sea Base trip.  We'll see...

Our lodge has several cub-dads there were OA as youth and have reactivated.  So, for sure not out of the ordinary.

I'd guess you could register with a unit in some capacity in the "north", which would put you in that council/lodge.  I don't think that would require you to drop your current troop membership.  However, if memory serves, you can only be in on OA lodge at a time.  So you wouldn't be able to register with the lodge your current troop is associated with.

5 hours ago, WonderBoy said:

]

(And don't get me started on having a separate hat, slide, neckerchief and, in some cases, belt for each year. If a Scout is truly thrifty, they can make do with the perfectly serviceable uniform they already have. Just my $0.02)

Sounds like a "Pack Set" of these items might be a good idea...

2 hours ago, qwazse said:

Tell that to Son #2 who held a swimming partial for 5 years, then decided to earn Hiking at age 17.9. 

My apologies.  I do tend to come up with quite a few half-baked ideas!  🤔

I guess what I was getting at, is that I see hiking or cycling MB's as more significant accomplishments...planning and doing the 20 mile hike or 50 mile ride, especially.  But yes, for a scout who's not comfortable with swimming, that MB will be just as much of an accomplishment.

5 hours ago, perdidochas said:

I agree with the one Citizenship MB. I would also combine Personal Management and Family Life into "Personal and Family Management."  I would also keep Enviro Science (and kill Sustainability, which is an expansion of the worst parts of enviro science), but add more outdoor activity to it.  I agree with Wilderness Survival addition.  Maybe with the Swimming or Hiking or Cycling, make it a "pick 2."  I would also put Nature MB back as an Eagle required badge.  (with maybe an option for Wildlife Management). 

I've never quite got the Swimming/Hiking/Cycling choice.  Swimming just seems so much easier than either of the other two...maybe require swimming for everyone, then a choice of Cycling, Hiking, or (Lifesaving + Mile Swim).

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

This is more in line with what I have seen too.  The Scouting program is not providing the sense of adventure, challenge, and fun that it did generations ago.  So, many boys are simply losing interest in it.

Whether it's because we've become safer, because boys have raised their expectations, or something else - I'm not sure.  It feels plausible that it's because the current crop of Scout leaders have been driven to be less adventurous and more risk adverse - but again, I don't really know.

 

I think it's a variety of things.  Top of the list is top-down risk avoidance, which results in some policies that provide the basis of the "scouts are going soft" narrative.   I'm thinking of things like rules against water balloons, wheelbarrows during service projects, Lazer tag, etc.  Every time there's another "you can't do that anymore" we take a hit.

You can be safe and be adventurous and challenging at the same time.  You just have to accept some level of risk.  Perhaps a good start would be to accept the same level of risk as a high school football team.

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

Yep - I think that's a pretty spot on analysis of the situation.  Not sure that I agree that being safe is the core problem, but it's an idea and props to him for thinking up a solution.

It's not that being safe is a problem.  The problem is that, any program that promises adventure is going to have have some associated risk.  And, given the current state of risk management is now devolved into complete risk avoidance, you wind up with the "watered down" program that is not as popular/marketable/whatever you want to call it.  So, rather then building independence, you wind up promoting hand-holding.  BSA's not there yet, but I can see how the public perception is that we're headed in that direction.

1 hour ago, David CO said:

Do they have any formal affiliation with the USCCB? Their website doesn't say that they do.

It says that it "relates" to the USCCB. It talks about "interaction and dialog" with the Secretariat of the Laity and Family Life". 

 

https://www.nccs-bsa.org/index.php/national-css-administration/bylaws

Voting members of the NCCS are appointed by diocese, by their various bishops.  An episcopal liaison (currently Bishop Guglielmone of Charleston, SC) is appointed by the USCCB.

5 hours ago, David CO said:

Same here. My unit has never had a single contact with NCCS. NCCS seems to parrot whatever BSA says. 

 

I"m not sure why a unit would have contact with NCCS; contact would typically be with your local diocesan Scouting committee (whose chair and chaplain are appointed by, or at least recognized by, your local bishop).  NCCS administers the various Catholic religious emblems at the national level, but again, those are processed via the local committee or chaplain.

Oh, and the one adult that just crossed over...sounds like they're well meaning, but I'd try to get a different adult to go to the new scout program.  I'm assuming he's the previous Webelos den leader?  Have him take SM specific and/or IOLS or something like that.

Like others said it's not the numbers it's what they're doing.

If they're registered, trained, stay out of the way, etc., I don't think it's a problem (unless you pay the adults registration fees, and you've got more than you need).

Get any new/unknown/helicopters signed up for adult training so they'll be occupied with something.

Dawn and a little water, soak the stain in that for a few hours or overnight then wash.  Lather, rinse, repeat.  As others have said, DO NOT DRY IN THE DRYER until you are sure the stain's all gone; that will set it and you'll never get it out.

11 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Actually the bare minimum of time to go from Scout to First Class is 3 months, and that is for the physical fitness requirements ( 1 month each for Tenderfoot, Second Class, and First Class. So the absolute earliest for First Class if Girls start on Feb. 1 would be May 1st, 2019  September 1st for Star, March 1st for Life, and August 2020 the earliest for a female Eagle. looking around Facebook, there are troop that have siblings already working on advancement so that as soon as they are allowed to join, they can get rank ASAP.

Yeah, I thought about the 3-month possibility...that would (in addition to the physical fitness) require a troop/patrol activity (other than a meeting) almost every week for the three months.

Reading your last sentence...I'm hoping there aren't units who are planning to "count" pre-Feb 1 work for advancement.  You've got to be registered to complete advancement, right? (rhetorical question...)

I'm just afraid the race to be "FIRST!" will result in someone missing the journey...

2 minutes ago, FireStone said:

I'm assuming that date was chosen as the earliest possible time that a girl could have joined and then completed the requirements. Is that really possible? If a girl can only register with a Troop February 1, 2019, can she really make Eagle in 22 months? 

I wonder if it's sort of warning to Troops: Don't even bother trying to submit applications for girls before December 2020, we'll know that you started too early, cut corners, etc. 

 

I think that timeline's possible (though crazy!).  6 months to get to 1st Class, 4 to Star, 6 to Life, and 6 to Eagle.  That's the 22 months.

That's doable, but they'd have to fit the 10 non-meeting Troop/Patrol activities in, in 6 months.

My experience is similar to that of @Eagle94-A1.  Our Pack is staying boys only as is our troop.  Even with all the media hype we've had very little interest from parents interested in getting their girls into the BSA program.  For now if we get any requests I'll probably refer them to other units in our district that are doing to Family/Linked setup; and those parents who want boys in an all-boy unit can refer to us.

I hope when the dust settles there will be variety of different arrangements so that families can pick what's best for them (coed, linked, all-boy, etc.). 

1 hour ago, David CO said:

I think we all know the answer to that one. BSA is insisting that every volunteer be registered. Since we don't have a registered position for a parent driver, they get registered as either a committee member or ASM. I don't blame the volunteers for not stepping up to do the job they got registered as, instead of the job they actually volunteered for.

 

I've been thinking of using the "Unit Scouter Reserve" (91U) position for folks like this.  Does anyone actually use it?

10 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

When confronted with the 6 essentials for a hike, the trainers had no response and just cited the instruction manual

This is what made me think the instructors didn't know what they were talking about.  I mean, don't take water on a hike?  Seriously?  I could (maybe) understand a suggestion to carry a *reasonable* amount (i.e, don't tell a Tiger to carry 3 gallons of water for a one mile hike) but other than that...

Sounds like the trainers were told "just go teach this" without any preparation or anything.

Maybe the instructors just didn't know what they were talking about?

16 minutes ago, David CO said:

The article said that the university will continue to offer these activities through their staff supervised outdoor program, so they are not totally banning the outdoor activities. They are requiring these outdoor activities to be organized and supervised by staff.

This sounds similar to BSA banning units from organizing and supervising their own shooting activities. BSA requires that some activities be organized and supervised by the council staff.

So, I would argue that the university is not eliminating the activities. They are treating their college students like cub scouts.

 

Yeah, I guess the comparison of college students being treated like cub scouts is pretty accurate.  It's sad that a University feels the need to treat adults as if they are elementary school students.

Unfortunately, modern "risk management" seems to have morphed into "risk elimination," which results in program elimination or banning of certain activities, given that for any event risk can't (by definition) be zero.

(As an aside, I was the safety officer of my University's Scuba Club back in the day.  We never, to my knowledge, had a serious diving-related injury.)

2 hours ago, ParkMan said:

We're starting to experiment with the Unit Scouter Reserve position.  The idea is to point those people to it that want to register, but not take training or take on a role.  I'm not sure if it will fly - but we'll see.

 

 

I'm wondering if we'll start to see that one used with the new rule that all adults on outings more than 72 hrs have to be registered.  Like for a parent that's not otherwise involved, but helps drive to summer camp or something like that.