Eagle94-A1

National came out with this rule a few years back. Page 21 of the GTSS states "Local council approval is needed for unit-coordinated overnight camping activities involving other units not chartered by the same organization. Units that wish to host events involving other units that do not share the same charter partner must have approval from their council. This includes events for packs, troops, crews, and ships from the same council; neighboring councils; the same territory; or other territory" Stupid rule I know. I Think it was put into place to prevent some units from doing their own summer camps and camporees. I know 3 troops in one council use to put on their own summer camp, and invited others to attend. It was a better quality and cheaper summer camp, although limited to 1 weeklong session. That took away the council. I do not know if other troops are still involved, but since the 3 troops had the same CO, they can still get away from it.

1. Have a handout with a list of gear AS WELL AS a list of household items you can substitute. 2. Have someone bring gear as well as household items to substitute. 3. Talk about what to look for if purchasing gear. 4. EMPASIZE THAT HOUSEHOLD ITEMS CAN BE USED IF THEY CANNOT AFFORD CAMPING GEAR. Major emphasis. I had someone bring all their latest greatest gear, and it was scaring some of the parents. Had to tell him to emphasize he has been camping for several years and accrued this stuff over time. I had to show the how to use household items. 5. Tents. Set up a tent to demonstrate. BUT emphasize each tents is different and you need to borrow or buy one in advance to set up in advance and make sure you have everything. 6. MAKE IT FUN!

1988 or 1989. I remember the approximate year because we had a physician, who was also registered with BSA with the troop, who would give us free physicals. The year No one-on-one contact came out, the troop committee chairman sat in the physical as well. I remember asking why he was present, and her said the new rule. In my smartaleckness of the time I commented, "Oh yeah we really need to worry about Doc_________________ since he has 11 kids and one on the way."

I have a long time Scouter of the troop who does not like the fact that the troop is owned by the church and the pastor can change how we do things. We have had a change in leadership recently and the new pastor has asked us to stick to our Scout room, and avoid going into other areas unless we reserve them in advance. In the past, we had free reign as long as it was not in use.

thank you.

When does national EVER listen to the volunteers? 3 instances come immediately to mind. I piloted the NSP way back when, and it was a complete and utter failure, yet they implemented it. Second time was "Instapalms" Of those polled about "Instapalms," 94% were either against ( 18%) or strongly against (76%) Yet they went with it anyway. 3rd time was the June 2015 Cub Scout Program. Several years by volunteers went into developing the program, and at least 1 member of the committee got input from active Cub Scout leaders on the ground. Program implementation info came out in advance at RTs, and RT attendees knew the changes would be a paradigm shift causing lots of changes. In my neck of the woods, those packs that went to RT got the info and implemented great programs. Those packs that did not attend RT freaked out and complained about all the changes., with some parents commented it makes it to hard for the Cubs. December 2016, without any advance notice National dumbs down the Cub Scout program changing requirements mid year. Thankfully my pack kept with the original requirements and plans until May, and changed things around again. Unless you have money or a PhD, I do not think National will listen to you.

I agree with Malraux, keeping secrets, especially in regards to YP is an extremely bad idea. Further I am interested in what safety improvements . Some of the the ideas to improve Scouting that have been listed on previous threads by survivors are in place, and have been for years, and in some cases decades.

The only Coalition I know about the the Coalition for Abuse Scouts for Justice. And I know about them because of this website. I would guess 90% of volunteers do not know what is going on, or care, as they are focused on their units. COVID has hit many of us big time and we are struggling to survive. As for safer Scouting, the only recommendation I am aware of is removing the 72 hour rule (non-registered adults can camp for a max of 72 hours at an activity) for Scouts BSA, Sea Scouts, & Venturing. The plan is to still keep non-registered adults up to 72 hours at the Cub Scout since that is family camping focused and in my experience EVERYONE in the family goes camping. Volunteers currently undergo background checks, YPT training, 2 Deep Leadership, 18 to 20 year olds no longer count towards 2 Deep Leadership, and all activities require 2 registered adults in attendance, or a parent in the case of Merit Badge Counseling (and I bet that will be gone since it appears most folks use MBUs now to get MBs. Additionally volunteer applications are still reviewed against the IVF to keep folks who have no criminal convictions but have committed a crime out of the program.

While I know folks will do stupid things, including those over 21, I would still like to see the raw data to analyze this information.

You and me both. I remember back in the day being told by a newly crossed over adult, that I was to young to know what I was doing. Thankfully that adult didn't burn anything down with what he was doing.

Could you please elaborate?

Scouting lost phenomenal folks due to the changes in the age policy, All of them feel that BSA disrespected them. Which is really sad because in my experience the 18-20 year olds are better Scouters than the recently crossed over adults because A. they have the knowledge, skills, and abilities already, despite the lack of official training, and B. they were the peers and role models of the Scouts, and they already have the respect of them. In one case the person who aged out would be unable to follow YP policies outside of Scouting since he is still in HS and several of his classmates are involved in Scouting. Since he is not registered, he can contact the Scout anytime needed now.

That's because back in 1989, someone equated earning First Class and retention. Two factors that were never taken into account were 1) Activity level of troops and 2) LDS 11 year old patrols and mandatory registration in Scouts.

Agree. My middle son has had issues because of the paper pushing some of the paperpushing requirements for some of the active ones. Right now it the trail cooking requirements for Cooking. Two quotes come to mind with this. 1. "OUTING is three-fourths of ScOUTING." and 2. "SCOUTING IS OUTING!" In the 1970s, BSA took tried to take the outing out of Scouting to the point that between 1972 and 1979, you could earn Eagle without a single night of camping. BSA took a nosedive in membership, and Bill Hillcourt had to come out of retirement to save the BSA. Zoom MB classes are wrong.

Does anyone remember when they went from 3 camp outs to be First Class to 6 camp outs to be First Class, and folks were so ticked off that about the increase that 19 months later they change it back to 3 camp outs? January 1, 2016 was when 6 camp outs were required for First Class. August 1, 2017 was when they changed it back?

Agree with the sentiment that Eagle is becoming to academic. I had a SMC with one of my guys and the topic came up. This is a Life Scout, with only the project and a few MBs to complete. He complained about the MB giveaways at most MBUs, and most online classes he has talked to other about. Just showing up gets you the MB in some cases. For him, it is the adventure that keep him: Cycling, whitewater, blackpowder, etc. He plans to earn Eagle, he's way to close to stop, but feels it does not have the same value as it did when his dad and I got ours. And I agree.

From experience and observation, there is a reason why mountain biking has shorter distances. My troop started working on Cycling MB during COVID using the road biking options. Spent a year working up to the 50 mile trip and did it successfully. 3 of the Scouts decided to do the mountain biking program at summer camp a month and a half after doing the 50 mile bike trip. THEY. WERE. OVERWHELMED. AND. EXHAUSTED. AND.QUIT. AFTER.THE.FIRST.DAY! (MAJOR EMPHASIS) Again these were three Scouts who had spent a year road cycling with the troop and on their own. They completed the 50 miles in the time frame ( with anywhere from 45 to 80 minutes to spare), and the downhill mountain biking trail completely exhausted them.

Going to play Devil's Advocate, so bear with me. I do like some program on camp outs. I want it stuff that the Scouts wants to do. BUT I want it also flexible enough that we can leave it out, or change it around as needed. Also want some down time where the Scouts can goof off, play guitar, etc. Reason why I say that is we had a lock in with no plans except dinner, SMCs so I can get to know my Scouts better, and prepare for our 100th anniversary. It was a mess with the Scouts themselves complaining about lack of organization. As for having fun, if it is not fun, no one will stay around, especially after earning Eagle. I've seen too many folks get Eagle and leave over the years because they are in it because of their parents. The ones having fun tend to stick around until they age out.

@ThenNow, Thank you for the link.

I do not know if the LC would tell us or not. Somewhere on the net there is a list of COs listed, if known. I also do not know how complete it is. The link to the list was posted on one of the bankruptcy pages a while back. I did access it to see if any of the units/COs I was involved with were listed, including the one unit I do know had 2 victims. None were listed. I think because the unit with 2 victims was prosecuted and dealt with, the victims are not part of this lawsuit.

As many others have noted: Agree we are here because BSA DID do something to prevent abuse using the legal standards of the time. Agree totally and it was one reason why the IVF was private, it could lead to legal trouble if the person in the IVF was never convicted. In another thread, someone posted a link to a file from 1968-69 about a volunteer who abused 12 Scouts while an ASM. Because none of the parents wanted their sons to testify in a court martial, the perp was discharged from the military instead of convicted of a crime. Because BSA had him in the IVF, he was prevented from getting back into the BSA. IMHO this is an example of how the IVF worked to protect youth. Agree 100% on this one as it will open everyone associated with it to lawsuits.

One of the reasons for using historical perspective is because society and technology were different than today. There were no mandatory reporting laws. Without witnesses pressing charges and willing to testify, there was nothing legally could be done. Please note that in the case linked, the abuse happened in 1968, which predates mandatory reporting laws, and page 9 of the record indicates that "None of the parents involved would allow their sons to go on a witness stand in a military court martial to testify...." Sadly that happened a lot more often than not. And without victims, or their parents, willing to press charges and testify, the perps were not prosecuted. As technology, this was before computers databases with near instantaneous access to information and emails with prompt responses. Everything mad to be sent to national and manually reviewed. In my opinion the case cited showed how the Ineligible Volunteer File worked the way it was suppose to. Now Do I wish the abuse had happened, ABSOLUTELY NOT. Do I wish the USAF were able to court martial the perp? Absolutely.

I've had to miss a few summer camps because my work would not allow me to take off, despite having the time. One summer I was fortunate in that the camp was 30 minutes away from work, and I was able to commute to and from camp. The one that irked me was when I found out that one of my coworkers asked for second week off at the last minute and got it. When I asked for a second week, to go to summer camp, I was told no. It worked out in the end: I had to take 8 weeks off for surgery and recovery. I am at a new job, and I do not have a lot of vacation time, especially since there are 2 weeks, 1 in summer and 1 in winter, where the job shuts down and vacation is mandatory. So my troop takes summer camp that week now.

In the summer of 1992, i helped the national Scout Shop in my council move to the new office building. During the move, was given BSA energy bars to snack on. When I asked why they were not selling them, I was told that GSUSA sent a cease and desist letter claiming they were infringing on Girl Scout cookies.

I do not know about the 1970s, but as far back as the 1980s, a council Scout Executive could not stay in the same council and go from DE to SE. There is a rule that a Director of Field Service (#2 in most councils) cannot move into a vacant SE position in their council. And it does tend to be a long path. National looks at the needs of a council, and gives the executive board a list of SE nominees that have a track record of fixing the council's issues at the time. For example, my council had a membership issue at one time, and the SE had a track records of fixing membership issues. Another time we had a program issue, and the nominees were program folks. Our current SE is a fundraising problem solver. I have met good pros who are still in DE positions after 20+ years because they do not "specialize" in problem solving.