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.

11 hours ago, skeptic said:

Okay; maybe workable?  Also seems ripe to be abused if number of units is a stat?   hmmmmm

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.

On 9/7/2024 at 12:18 PM, PACAN said:

we fire professionals in the past for padding numbers with phantom registrations?

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.

On 6/21/2024 at 11:36 AM, OaklandAndy said:

What makes an area/community eligible to participate in the ScoutReach program? I'm sure there is some type of income cap for the area, county, or something like that. 

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.

1 hour ago, Tron said:

If you're running a 12 month program as prescribed you can easily add these adventures and provide the learning experience for the scouts.

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

2 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

To help the organization survive in a state that they want (instead of looking for ways to change it for the better), BSA professionals expel dissenters.

Although dated, here is a blog which elaborates on this: (not a Daily KOS fan, in general, but I do read stuff there to learn how others think...)

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2006/3/4/191709/-Supressing-Dissent-in-Boy-Scouts-a-model-for-the-GOP

From the writing:

"The combination of lap dog boards and control of senior and middle volunteer management positions give the pros an immensely powerful position from which to block reform (and protect their own positions).  It will take a grass roots rebellion or a determined legal attack at the top to actually reform the system nationally.  Small determined groups with strong ethics and strong stomachs can achieve local results but, unless the tide shifts nationally, the system always tries to return to the old status quo."

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.

On 5/22/2024 at 3:32 PM, Cburkhardt said:

What is it about the BSA that has allowed it to survive?

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.

5 minutes ago, DannyG said:

Our troop has allowed it on extenuating circumstances (ie. parent drops off kid at camp late and leaves) but it doesn't always work for everyone. Sometimes the troop is camping for fun nearby, so we can make it work out . Sometimes the troop is out on a trek in the wilderness and you wouldn't be able to find us as easily. But I think we have to realize this gap exists on the older side of the program, not just Cubs.  I see both sides.

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.

10 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

We might consider making the program more inviting by offering additional day camps or 1-night camping options. I find this preferable to an indoor program (or no program).

Wise man once said, "OUTING is three-fourths of ScOUTING." ( The author of the 2010's edition misquoted him, he obviously didn't do the math).

Scouting and sports are two completely separate programs, with completely different goals and objectives.

So jealous.

2 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

Also factor in impact to unit planning. If your council is different than ours, God bless. I can look at our council calendar today for August-December, and there are no dates for camporee listed. I can see OA weekend dates and NYLT weekend dates. Our unit is not unlike many around us, that planning meeting with PLC will take place before the end of July. If we don't have event dates to consider, then those events are not going to be considered. We will give deflection to not plan our weekend for one of the months there is an OA weekend for those who wish to attend that, but we aren't going to plan around both months. 

Well, at least your council isn't cancelling events with little to no forewarning. 3 events have been canceled so far this year.

4 hours ago, Tron said:

You are correct, and it's funny how this unit has higher costs because they are going out of council. By refusing to participate in the council of registry they have become a cash cow for the neighboring council. Man it sure is thrifty when that unit pays all those out-of-council fees in neighboring councils. 

Depends. Are the units getting value from the out of council fees? If paying an extra $25-$35 gives the Scouts a better experience, yes it is worth it.  I can tell you I have been to some camps that until major improvements in staffing occur, we will not go there. 

Scouting Adventure should start in 4th grade. more later

WOW.  

I wish that would have been the case for friends of mine. One friend of mine had the cable line across the street from his house. His house was less than 100 feet from the poles they were using, and they would not connect him.

Worse was the friend who, lived on a corner lot. because his physical address was on a street not in their service area, they would not connect him to the network despite the cable going through his side yard, and connecting neighbors on the street his address was not on.

10 minutes ago, OaklandAndy said:

Our camp upgraded it's wifi to help leaders who need to work. While it's only accessible from "base camp" and not at the campsites.... 

You are lucky. There are some places that are so remote, big telecom does not provide internet services. Only option is satellite, which is extremely pricey. Sadly out state legislators nixed local government agencies from forming their own after big telecom complained about losing customers in the two areas that had it.

2 hours ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

Your camps have a McDonald's nearby !?!? 😛

I'm jealous. Our favorite council camp is way the heck out there. It's delightful ... until you need something.

35-40 minutes away is the McDonald.

38 minutes ago, DannyG said:

They don't put in anything close to 40 hours that week, but they are able to knock out some work hours on WiFi.

Your camps have wifi? LOL

Seriously, wifi in the past has been a serious concern. There is one camp the troop likes that has extremely pour internet, to the point where their office staff will take turns driving into town to use the local McDonald's wifi.

I have found that pros come and go, usually on a yearly basis. And most folks stay around until their kids age out the movement. There has always been a cadre of long time volunteers, whose knowledge. skills, abilities, time, and treasure could be relied upon to keep things running. I have been in multiple councils in my 42 years of Scouting. And that fact is one of the few constants.