Eagle94-A1

Don't go there. So much has been lost, it is incredible. Last time I taught ITOLS, I had to go through my collection and make copies to provide the info they need. Today's handbook and field book are shadows of what they were when William 'Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt wrote them.

I agree with partial funding, you want folks to have skin in the game. I've seen first hand folks who get a free ride, and do not take full advantage. Heck one guy got a scholarship from council to attend, only to back out at the last minute. Talk about making folks angry. And if you go with it, make it anonymous. There can be hard feelings for those who do not get it. I received a full scholarship for youth training back in the day, and my friend was ticked off. We worked it out, we each got 1/2. Since he paid for 1/2 the week, when an opportunity to do something else came up, he turned i

I know when my father walked out, my mom was very glad I had postive male role models in the form of my SM and ASMs. Over the years, I lost track of the number of single moms looking for male role models. Most of the Troops I've been in had all male direct contact Scouters, females have been on the committee. I've seen one outstanding unit with a female SM. Troop growing up had a female ASM once I became a Scouter, and she was fine. Grant you, she served on committee for a long number of years before becoming ASM. However I've seen female ASMs, and male ASMs too, that baby the Scouts,

Forgot to add, there are ways to permanently remove and intimidate opposition. My SE had one long time volunteer permanently removed from the BSA when he opposed the SE and some of his decisions. This act intimidated some of the opposition. It also caused some to feel hopeless, as if nothing could be done to get things back on track. When the new SE showed up, he cleaned house real quick.

My SE did NOT have the trust of those in the field. Best example of that was when he finally left. folks were throwing champagne parties to celebrate. He was able to maintain being SE, and not get removed from his position, because he got "Yes Men" to be in key council positions. Those who opposed him were eventually removed from the council executive board. Funny thing is that when we got a new SE, those who were removed from the board got reinstated over time. One thing I learned being in 5 different councils and under a bunch of pros; every situation is different and every person is

The people to be appointed to the nominating committee have to be approved by the SE on the council level, and both the SE, or is designate, and the DE. When I was a DE, my SE would not allow any of the folks suggested on the district nominating committee, and as a result we didn't have one. Everyone on the list for positions were selected by the SE.

A few comments from a former pro. 1) While the council president selectes the nominating committee, the Scout Executive (SE) wields enormous power behind the scenes. I've seen good people who were proposed for council level position, but because they were not 'Yes Men" and the SE said they would be a bad choice. Even when those of us in the field wanted someone in particular. We currently have someone who would like to fill a district Key 3 role, but will not be allowed to serve in that role due to the SE. Like Tahawk, that position has been vacant for 2+ years. 2) While national doe

I am no longer doing FOS and it is National's fault: The increase in registration is affecting me financially. $34 (we pay $1 extra for insurance), per person per year for 4 is $136 due at one time since both units charter at the same time. It would be $170 if my wife officially registered since becoming a WDL 3 years ago. However, since none of the applications had been processed over a 2 year period, despite paying the fee, she has said it aint worth the frustration. I will play Devil's Advocate for the council though: One reason why some councils may not have had town halls on the matt

I've seen pushy parents that cause their sons to lose interest and/or rebel. My uncle pushed my cousin to get Eagle at 13. As soon as he became an Eagle, he quit. Still had 5 more years of adventures left. Another Scout I know has been dragging his feet because he is not interested, but his dad wants another Eagle in the family. The troop changed from a hiking and camping troop, to a high speed, low drag advancement oriented troop because Dad is the SM and wants his son to be Eagle. Troop went from 3 active patrols (approximately 24 Scouts), to one patrol of 4 active Scouts. And 3 of t

My responses in red

While it's more personal, it is Scout related. We have a small group of 4 Scouts and 2 adults going backpacking. My middle son, the one who has been in the troop less than a year, wants to do the AT this summer, and this will be his second shakedown trip. When I came home from work, he was 95% packed. I did a shake down while he finished getting the gear. He's ready to go and he did it on their own. To make it more interesting, oldest just informed me that as an incentive for middle son to prep for the AT, everytime he does a certain distance with a full pack, the oldest will allow h

May I quote the late William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt, the man who saved the BSA in 1979 for rule #3. Regarding Scouts, adults should "Train 'em. Trust 'em. LET THEM LEAD!" The successful troops I've been in all these years have followed that mantra. I'm use to sitting in my chair drinking coffee. Only the current troop I am with and one other had these type of adult issues.

I'm not a fan of by-laws because they are extremely legalistic, and someone can argue that according to XYZ rule they met the requirements, do whatever event, etc. In fact it's already happened. We have two Scouts who "earned" their Tenderfoot. But there was a lot of "discussion" about the requirements by their parents, and the SM signed off despite his, and other Scouters', reservations because of the legelese in advancment policy. Personally I do NOT like adults signing off on the S-T-2-1 requirements Since it's A) taking responsibility away from the PLs, Instructors, SPL, etc and B) T

I do not think any of the youth know a thing about this yet. And I agree, it's not youth led. Scouts are not being given responsibility. What ticks me off is that we had this discussion a little over a year ago, some things were done to make it more youth led, AND IT WAS WORKING! Was it perfect? NO. Was it chaotic? YES. Did the Scouts make mistakes? ABSOLUTELY! And did they learn from those mistakes? YES INDEED! Did they have room to improve? OF COURSE THEY DID! But apparently the change is not fast enough for some folks, especially the new parents because I have heard them complain about how

Well here's another update. There was leaders' meeting at the camp out this past weekend. It was suppose to have been a weekday, but that didn't come through. All but 2 adults were at this impromptu meeting, me and one other. I admit I am a bit miffed because this is the second time they had a meeting on a camp out that I was unable to attend. And the SM and ASM who briefed us last nite both knew I wanted to talk about the troop situation at this meeting. But there is nothing I can do. I do not know what happened this weekend on the camp out, but something did regarding the new Scouts. Lon

I've seen first hand what happens when Scouts who had Cub leaders "Forget about the requirement and pass him anyway." or got rather "creative" or "sea lawyery" in meeting AOL requirements so the Cub could move to Boy Scouts, and and it is not pretty. Out of the den we got just like that, we lost 3 outright,have one we have not seen since summer camp, have 1 who will not camp, and 2 who won't camp unless a parent is with them, and will sneak into parents tent at night. It's gotten to the point that the adults in the troop are reconsidering doing an NSP for the group, and having adults teach

Even having another adult is not always safe. I was with 2 other adults and 3 other Scouts in the situation I had with the "Scout" above. Long story short until the 3 other youth told the contingent leaders the truth, that they snuck out after curfew and when we caught them and tried to take them back and they ran off, we were being blamed for allowing youth to be out on the college campus after the conference's lights out. Yep, only when the other youth told the truth were the 3 adults believed.

Sadly, YP and 2 deep do not cover everything. Nor is everyone in Scouting a true 'Scout.' We had a situation where one of our female Scouters was in the shower house during the scheduled time, which was after youth lights out. One youth was caught being a peeping Tom by her and she reported him. The Scout accused her of making a pass at him when confronted with being out after hours and being around the shower house. Because it was a case of "he said, she said," she had her membership as a volunteer permanently revoked by national and placed in the ineligible volunteer files. He got a slap on

Worst case scenario, one Life Scout back in the day was denied Eagle because when the council checked their records after his EBOR, they had him listed as a First Class Scout still. Thankfully between his handbook and the Advancement Reports that were indeed turned in, he was approved.

Sorry for the confusion. let me try and clarify. Not only do we have folks thinking 11-17 yo Scouting will become "Family camping" with siblings being able to tag along, but also that if there are no female Scouters attending, as long as dad of the female Scout attends, there is no YP violation since it is 'family camping." When I tried to explain the Venturing YP policies, i.e. female adult must attend, I'm told "no because as long as the dad attends, it's family camping."

Yes it is allowed for Cub Scouts. But I'm talking at the 11-17 yo Scout level. Already have folks mention how if they cannot get females to camp with the girls, or camp in general since some troops have stated they will go coed anyway, that as long as dad is camping, daughter can camp too. Which as some know from Venturing / Exploring experience, that is not the case.

Additionally, some of the same folks thinks that since Cub Scout family camping has no requirements on the genders of the adults attending, i.e. all dads could camp with their sons and daughters or all moms camp with with their sons and daughters, that if no ladies can attend a camp out, as long as the female Scout's dad is in attendance, it will be allowed. All because BSA is using "Family Scouting."

Actually have folk in my district who believe that the 11-17 year old program will have a new role for parents and younger siblings because the BSA keeps using "Family." They think it will be a continuation of Cub Scouts.

Not only is training needed, but mentoring as well. and even more important, A WILLINGNESS TO LEARN! We have one parent who is a wilderness survival freak. Been to multiple survival schools and programs, certified to teach some of the levels with one program, etc. But zero experience as a Boy Scout or Boy Scout leader. Still in Cub Scout leader mode: complaining the boys aren't doing some things, jumping in and doing things for the boys, etc. Trying to talk top him is a chore as he won't listen.

I've done USS ALABAMA, USS YORKTOWN as well as the USS KIDD as a Scout, Scouter, and employee (yeah I did nite time tours back in the day ) The KIDD may be smaller, but the restoration to WWII status is 99.5% accurate (Yes I know what the Korean War item that was added to the KIDD is that cannot be removed is )They have the best overnight program. Although I admit to some bias. A lot of blood, sweat, tears and money have gone into restoring the KIDD.