Eagle94-A1

I agree completely. But when you are not allowed in the schools to recruit, eventually your pack ages out or moves to a thriving one when they get too few to recharter. Depends upon the council as I have found out. Some councils, for whatever reason, do NOT want units doing their own recruiting and round ups. Instead they set up everything, and tell us when they want us to be at the round up. And in other councils each unit has assigned schools, usually to get Scouts int eh same neighborhood to be together, because of bussing, multiple packs recruit form the same school. It is crazy.

I have mixed emotions on this one. One one hand I fully understand the rationale. It is a lot of work to support a struggling unit. On the other hand, i am in a struggling troop. Our pack folded about 10 years ago when we stopped having a DE that would get us into the school system to do round ups. The troop has dwindled, and was on the verge of folding. Work of mouth has been our best recruiting over the years. Almost have the troop have transferred from another, larger troop, that on paper is "more successful" but is actually not doing much. One large troop locally had a strong pac

If i have not deleted them, i will share the emails and texts.

Are you serious? Several years ago BSA had a poll in which 94% of the respondents were either against (18%) or strongly against (76%) the proposal, yet BSA did it anyway. 94% OPPOSED AND THEY DID IT ANYWAY! (emphasis). National has repeatedly announced membership increases AT THE LAST MINUTE. One year they even told units to hold off on rechartering until they finalized the price. People repeatedly complained because units had already created budgets, and round ups were going on. Again, National was told repeatedly to give more notice to help the boots on the ground prepare, especially t

Ah, another Sea Explorer . Agree that the constant rewrites to the Exploring and Venturing programs over the years have severely hurt the program. And the lack of professional support also hurts, because most execs are clueless as professional training is focused on Cubs Scouts and Scouts. In all my time in Scouting, I have only ran into 2 dedicated Exploring/Venturing execs, and one of them was put in the position and had to teach herself about Exploring/Venturing. When I went thru PDL-1, everyone was suppose to go through either the Exploring Leader Basic Training or the Exploring Leader B

To clarify, the Venturing logo is green, white, and gold with green lettering. BUT I have clip art with the logo in maroon, white, and gold with maroon lettering. The solid maroon golf shirt was the Venture Crew/Patrol Activity Uniform shirt from 1989 onwards. Venturing had a maroon, white, and green golf shirt, that was an activity shirt. Varsity had a tan golf activity shirt with blaze writing. See below.

Forgot to add, maroon was the Venture crew/patrol signature color, and it almost became Venturing signature color. I have clip art with the Venturing Logo in maroon, gold, and white as well as green gold, and white. In fact, the Venturing golf shirt was maroon.

Actually Venturing did not have advancement, but "Recognitions" back in 1998, and there were 5 different Bronze Awards: Outdoors, Sea Scout, Sports, Arts& Crafts, and Youth Ministries/ Religious Life. It may sound like semantics, but it was emphasized that Venturing Did not use advancement as a method, and did not have ranks. You also had the Ranger Award as well. 2014 was when Advancement was incorporated into Venturing. I think you meant Sea Scout Quartermaster, as the Ordinary rank corresponded to the Sea Scout Bronze Award. The 1998 National Venturing Director actual

I admit our legal environment plays a part, but BSA gave a stat on peer-on-peer abuse, without citing the sources and/or showing the evidence, in the YPT 2.1 training I took. The 50% peer-on-peer abuse is what Michael Johnson has stated without showing the data.

My comments. 1. If memory serves, BSA tried that in the 1950s or 60s, and it didn't work out. 2. BSA tried it again from 1989 to sometime in the 2000s/2010s, again with no success. 3. Very few current Scouters are familiar enough with Venturing to make it work properly. Heck it is hard enough to get Troops working properly as many adults do not get how Scouting sis suppose to work, even with training. You can see that on all the various comments and questions on social media. 4. The demographic that other countries use to support this range, 21-30 year olds, have usually b

For reasons beyond my control, I have an ASM who is a helicopter grandparent. Good news is that at meetings I have a CC who will ride herd on them when I supervise the Scouts. And they are limiting the number of camp outs they go on since the adults sleep in tents, or hammocks, just like the youth, and he likes his comforts. But at home it is a different situation. The Scout may be packing his own gear, but grandparent is telling him what to bring and not bring. It is obvious extremely obvious when the Scout was doing a shakedown and kept asking the grandparent what a piece of gear is that he

Great question. Quick and easy answer is : IT. IS. NOT. SCOUTING! (bold and cap for major emphasis and not shouting) Detailed Answer. I do not know when exactly the shift occurred, But when I took Cub Scout Basic Leader Training way back in the day, and when I taught Webelos Den Leader Specific Training, there was an emphasis on transitioning from Cub Scouts to then Boy Scouts. The syllabi discussed how you needed to give them more and more responsibility, start letting them do things for themselves, and getting away from parents signing off on advancement. That is when the "whi

@fred8033, I hear ya. During that period I first joined a Sea Scout ship, after hearing the adventures one SM had when he was one. Sadly it was a non-traditional ship, and not very good. I lasted long enough to get Ordinary. Then I got reinvolved with the OA and BOOM I went. The Scouter Reserve was suppose to fill the wish you have, but it was not widely used until folks became obsessed with training requirements and JTE. But as I said, the 18-20 year olds I have spoken to feel both disrespected by National's pollicy that they no longer count towards YP requirements, and that Natio

For Venturing Advisers, I would say go after the 21+ years olds who aged out of the program. Some do remain in the area, and others who are addicted to Scouting in general, and Venturing in particular do volunteer wherever they move. Hard part now will be finding them. Sadly every single EBOR I have sat in on since 2018, the Eagles say they will stay active until aging out. Reminder that 2018 was when National said 18-20 year olds not only do not count for YP purposes, but also must essentially give up friends and/or classmates who are involved in Scouting who are under 18 because of YP r

Respectfully disagree. The best leaders for Venturing are the 18-20 year olds who are craving HA, but also are giving back to the troop as well. Sadly because BSA no longer gives the 18-20 year olds the respect they deserve, i.e. they no longer count towards 2 deep leadership, needs 2 registered adults over 21 when teaching a MB or 1 over 21 registered adult and 1 parent with them when teaching a MB, making them choose between Scout friends and schoolmates since they have to apply YPT policies to non-Scout life, but again they do not count towards 2 deep leadership, We are losing a lot of ex

Most definitely. I would add that the TG gets overwhelmed working with all of the new Scouts simultaneously. In a Traditional Patrol, older Scouts buddy up with the younger ones and work with them. Again concur. When I was a TG, if I was not actively working with someone, they were clueless as to what to do, even if I gave them specific instructions. And I was overwhelmed. In my case, adults did not get involved because we were an old fashioned Scout-led troop, unless it was disciplinary. After a year of trying, and also losing some scouts, we went back to Traditional Patrols. HOW

I wonder if SEs will be able to raid those unit accounts. Sadly i saw a SE raid the OA lodge's account that was to be used for camp improvements for conclave. When all the bills started arriving, there was no money to pay them.

I know in the early to late 1980s, 1982 - 1989 to be exact, Webelos were coming over as full dens. I do not know when the NSP was officially piloted, but in 1986, my troop was asked to pilot it. IT WAS A COMPLETE FAILURE and we went back to Traditional Patrols a year later. Imagine everyone's surprise when NSPs became a recommended model in August 1989

My thoughts. 1. Sea Scouts has been the exception to the Older Scout problem because they have customs and traditions dating back to 1912. Even when Sea Scouts turned into Sea Exploring, and you had traditional and non traditional ships, those traditional ships survived and thrived. 2. regarding advancement, that was NEVER meant to be a focus for Venturing, hence the original 5 Bronze in specialties, Gold, and Silver Awards. They were optional items. 3. Regarding the term Venture Scout, that term was already in use to those Scouts in Venture crews within troops. When Venturing

I think "expensive" may be relative. The troop paying $120 for 3 vehicles to park 2 nights plus over $300 for gas for a weekend backpacking trip on the AT is expensive. But I know compared to Philmont, it is dirt cheap.

First I hard of this. Didn't National try this in the 1950s, and it flopped? I've heard stories that folks were automatically enrolled as Explorers, but still remained with the troop. That is a great question. I know it is more expensive to do HA activities, but it is possible. But we are an "old school" troop not focused on advancement, but instead on fun and adventure. If it takes 4.5 year to get First Class, so be it.

A few reasons for Venture crew/patrols demise. 1. Not really popular outside of LDS units, and then it was those units that did not focus on sports. When the old Leadership Corps was turned into Venture Crews in 1989 (although some units like mine continued using Leadership Corps until we ran out of patches circa 1995), it did not have a huge following. I was hired in 1996 to create a high adventure program based upon the activity pins that were associated with the program, we had 0 interest, and I ended up doing COPE instead of because NO ONE signed up for it. 2. Varsity Teams and

Fixed that for you. Let's face it, National is the one setting the tone on this. National is producing training material that promotes advancement above all things, and positions of responsibility is part of that.

Depending upon who is taking care of them, I can see that. We had an former US Army armorer taking care of our day camp BB guns. He turned a bunch of abused and poorly taken care of BB guns, and turned them into competition quality bb guns. Sadly council found out about him, and recruited him for summer camp staff where he was the shooting sports director. Unless policy has changed since I went to camp school, or a council has figured out a way to get around the rules, National has prohibited packs from running their own shooting sports events. Cub Scout shooting sports are restrict

I know the camp I went to in the 1980s and worked at in the 1990s was mixed. With the exception of 2 classes ( Astronomy and Journalism) all MB classes were during the day. They did have "extras" at night time, i.e. First Aid and CPR certification, Hunter Safety, etc, one or two nites. Also some classes did have a 1 night program, i.e. Wilderness Survival, Camping, etc. While we wanted MBs, we wanted fun more. In fact we were told never to take more than 5 classes so that we could have at least last period with free swimming, boating, and shooting sports, so we can have fun. Night time had a m