Eagle94-A1

Talking to folks in the UK when they went coed, single gendered troop, whether all male or all female, gradually died off.

I am so glad that 1 camp I go to is not owned by the council, but rented to them.. Non-profit trust owns it, and will not give it to the council outright. Trusts handing over ownership of camps to councils has been a very bad move for about 20 years now, but especially in light of the ongoing bankruptcy.

I know my local Catholic Church was in the process of starting a new pack and troop. Then they decided against it. I am told it was the lawsuit and the insurance increases involved.

Yes, pros are are held accountable for the number of new units they start.

Yes, the practice didn't end in the 1970s. I knew councils that did it in the 1990s and later. A lot of UWs stopped funding because of this.

Only if they got caught. Even then, they would try to blame subordinates, even though they were the ones pushing it and doing it. If they were suspicions, and no hard evidence, they were "promoted" to smaller sized councils. But not everyone being sent to a smaller council was a screw up. Sometimes it was a way to get rid of the whistleblowers, "promoting" them to a higher position, but in a smaller council. Met an SE who was in this situation. Went from being a DFS with 3 FDs directly under him, and 18 DEs under them to being a SE with 1 FD and 3 DEs under him.

Yes, BSA did set up packs, troops, etc in the internment camps. part of it was to give a sense of normalcy, instill patriotism for the USA, etc. And there were interactions with local communities. More on that in a bit. As the article stated there was pro-Japan internees, to the point that they formed paramilitary units inside the camps. After the war, a lot returned to Japan. I do not remember the exact number, but I think that it is over 8000. I will try t find the book on this when I get the chance. And it wasn't just Issei ( Native Japanese in the US) but also Nisei (Native US of Japanese ancestry). Japan not only had an immigration policy like the Nazis which granted automatic citizenship to anyone of Japanese ancestry, but also had active recruiting and indoctrination programs set up prior to the war. And those pro-Japanese internees did cause lots of problems, both inside and outside the internment camps. As for involvement with local communities, one thing to remember is not all Japanese-Americans and Issei were interned, only those in the the Japanese Exclusion Zone, which was All of California, and parts of Washington, Oregon, and Arizona. Those Nisei and Issei outside the zone were not incarcerated, and in fact the War Department created some camps in areas with Japanese-American populations in the civilian community. In one locality, the pro-Japanese internees caused so much trouble to the non interned Japanese-Americans, the community wrote a letter to SecWar asking for the removal of the interment camp as it was creting tensions between them and their neighbors.

A bunch of mixed feeling on this one. I can see why being anonymous is important. I know folks who reported stuff to the council, and they become persona non grata. I had that happen to me when I reported an alcohol in camp problem. Dealing with camp staff was one thing, but dealing with the council professional staff was a completely different situation. But I also know it can be abused. As I posted elsewhere, a good friend was falsely accused of propositioning a Scout to save his own skin because he was being a peeping Tom.

If there are any national requirements, I do not know about them. Back in the late 1990s, there were no national requirements that I was told about, I and I started 2 ScoutReach units in my district, and a friend of mine was SM for three or four in the early 2000s.

That is the thing, most packs still use a 9 month cycle based upon the school year. In all my years in Scouting, in multiple councils, only 1 pack had a 12 month program, and even then it was modified: instead of weekly meeting, it was biweekly fun activities to have Cubs earn the Summertime Award. In fact the entire reason why that award was created was to give an incentive for packs to remain active in some way over the summer.

This is what happens when educators take over the program. BP said it best: "Boys can see adventure in a dirty old duck puddle, and if the Scoutmaster is a boys’ man he can see it too." “See things from the boy's point of view.” "A boy is not a sitting-down animal." "A fisherman does not bait his hook with food he likes. He uses food the fish likes. So with boys." We need folks writing advancement requirements who can see things through a kid's eye, remembering the excitement and adventures of their youth. We need folks writing advancement requirements who realize the importance of experimental learning, as opposed to formal learning. We need folks writing advancement requirements that understand that some folks, especially boys, learn by doing. We need folks writing advancement requirements that understand that failure is a learning method, probably one of the best. We need folks writing advancement requirements that understand giving responsibility to youth is a way to help them learn and grow. But most importantly We need folks writing advancement requirement that understand that we cannot be all things to all people because "The open-air is the real objective of Scouting and the key to its success." (sorry for some bolding, cannot undo it despite several attempts.)

Reading your post, and thinking how National will be "simplifying" the Scouts BSA program, It's as if multiple voices in my head are saying

Sadly I know one of the SEs mentioned in the article. He threatened a volunteer's son with not getting Eagle if the volunteer didn't do what he was told. And I have seen first hand volunteers removed for questioning SEs.

1. Legacy members and Volunteers. I grew up in the Scouting program, and the SM and ASMs were the "father figures" I looked up and sought advice from. My fellow Scouts were like brothers to me. In essence Scouting was my surrogate family. I continued on as a Scouter even when I had no kids, because I NEEDED to give back. There was no way I could ever repay my SM and ASMs for every thing they did for me. Closest I could do is give back. When I did have kids, I wanted them to have some of the same experiences and joys that I had as a Scout, and if possible even better ones. But the program is not the same as it was. The program has been watered down. Instead of adventure, the focus is now "Getting Eagle." The old standard of advancement was " Master the skills" and "The badge represents what a Scout CAN DO (emphasis added), not what he has done." Now the standard is "A badge recognizes what a Scout has done toward achieving the primary goal of personal growth. " Look at the number "academic" requirements in MBs, as well as purely academic MBs there are these days. And with National saying they will be "Simplifiying" the Scouts BSA program, there are a lot of concerns, including from BSA "cheerleaders" like Mike Walton about watering down the program further. And let's not forget the bad treatment of longtime volunteers by not only pros, but also newer volunteers. I have given examples in other posts of the mistreatment of experienced Scouters by pros. But go on some of any social media website, including this one, and you will have newer volunteers denigrating and insulting experienced volunteers and their concerns. I know I have been told in person and online that "you don't know what you are talking about," "(citation from G2SS, G2Am, etc) is wrong you can do..." and 'Scouting needs to change with the times." So a lot of volunteers , especially on district and council levels, are throwing in the towel. And trust me, it is EXTREMELY hard to replace them with folks witht he same knowledge, skills, abilities, time, and treasure. 2. Nostalgia. When you hear the terms "Scout," "Eagle", etc folks get images of the Norman Rockwell paintings and Follow Me, Boys. Scouting over the years has done so much good, that it has a positive image. Sadly the paper-pushing is slowly changing that adventure into another classroom. Worse, the dark side of Scouting is making an appearance, and folks are applying today's standards to activities 40+ years ago. Falsifying membership has slowly been coming out. The biggest obviously is the CSA Scandal. Whether you agree it is BSA's fault or not, it has hurt BSA.

During COVID, we had no choice but to allow families to pick up and drop off. Since everything was within 90 minutes (usually 45 minutes or less, but that one day trip) we had a few issues, but they were workable. HOWEVER post COVID had a major trip, 6+ hours away. family was going to be in the area prior to us and afterwards, so the decision to let us meet and drop off and pick up was made. That was a mistake. We got to the meet up point about 30 minutes late due to an accident on the highway. Family was upset that we were late. When asked when to expect arrival for pick up, we told them one time, but also said we could get back earlier, depending upon the backpacking pace. We said we would call them if we got back earlier. We did get back 2 hours earlier than anticipated, and called them. Because of the remoteness of the area cell service was limited and we could not get them. We waited and attempted to get them multiple times. The parents show up an hour after we told them. Yes we waited for 3 hours for the parents to show up. We could have been almost halfway to home. The Scouts were not happy.