Eagle94-A1

I can now understand why one troop let the Scouts advance using the requirements in the book they got as a brand new Scout instead of using updated requirements. Although that did hurt one Scout when he transferred to another troop that followed BSA policy. I know my youngest son's den is still using the June 2015-December 2016 requirements for advancement because updated books won't be out until Fall.

Other ideas: 4) Do not keep changing requirements on various things. They completely changed the CS adavancement less that 18 months they new requirements went into effect. They changed requirements for Second and First Class months after the revision. For cooking MB, the requirements changed something like 5 times in 7 year; one changed occured months after a previous change! 5) make the Webelos Program less Cub Scout and more Boy Scout. I am seeing so many ill prepared Webelos crossing over, then leaving. I do not know why this is happening, whether the current training is poor, or

SM got the 4 month terms from a podcast. And I have heard of a troop doing that due to sports seasons. I have not seen it in action, so I do not know how it will work. Plus the POR requirement does not have to be filled in one specific POR, you can use multiple PORs. For example, Oldest has his 6 months for Eagle from being SPL (4 months) and Librarian (2 months) The reason I am OK with it in the big scheme of things is because of the ASPL/SPL situation. That is my major concern. And I too feel that one adult is manipulating the situation. I think one adult honestly believes in the approa

Update from Scouters' meeting. SM will be staying in position. We will be having monthly PLC meetings for 30 minutes the first Monday of each month. Additionally the terms of office will be 4 months long instead of 6. The one of the things I have reservations on is the selection of ASPL and SPL. This election, both ASPL and SPL are going to be elected. Next election, the ASPL will move up to SPL, and troop elects ASPL. Again got reservations, but have seen this format work in other organizations. Had a feeling we would be going this route since 2 adults were pushing this, and a third is i

NSPs officially came about August , 1989. Same time they did away with Skill Awards, time requirements for T-2-1 ranks,, no more Scouts on BORs, etc. But some troops apparently did it like your troop prior to that, and it influenced National. Although I bet how the LDS troops do it, i.e. 11 year old Scout Patrol, caused national to create NSPs. I know my troop tried it in 1986 at the request of the council, and it was a complete failure. Every time I've seen NSPs in action, it is either a failure, or turns into Webelos 3. But that has been my experience. Some ideas.

CC is not active except for BORs. The one committee meeting we had was actually run by an ASM (Gunship) and I was there. It involved assigning duties to parents, and determining what fundraisers to do. Also explaining for the umpteenth time how Boy Scouts is different from Cub Scouts to the new parents. Only time you see the committee is for BORs otherwise. I agree, having everyone on the same page would help. And regular meetings are key to that. But several folks do not want to run the troop by committee. As noted above, there is resistance to having monthly PLC meetings at the Scout le

Best no cost fundraising idea may not be feasible in all areas of the country. One troop in southeast Louisiana sold "Snow Insurance" where if there is snow, the troop will clear your driveway and sidewalk. When I lived down there, no policy holder needed to make claim. I'm wondering if the troop honored their insurance policies the only time I now of true snow hitting the area: when the Saints won the Super Bowl.

IMHO his term ends in 3 weeks, so I am not concerned about replacing him. To answer Fred's questions: On a different note things may get interesting. SM may be stepping down. His recommendation for a replacement is Gunship since he has a history with the CO. We already know the CO won't appoint me since I am neither a member of the denomination nor congregation. Gunship grew up in the congregation, but is a member of a church closer to his house. Pray for me and my Scouts.

Thanks, I need it. One adult is classic Type A personality. He's known on the threads as "Gunship" because he he doesn't just hover, he jumps in and takes over. He grew up in the troop as a youth, and came back years later when the troop he was with folded. Thing is he is trained, but thinks training is useless since he is an Eagle and knows better. Apparently the troop did some interesting things back in the day, and he thinks it's perfectly OK to do them. Reminded him that the troop did fold, and that could have been one of the reasons for it folding. He blames the pack's CM for sending

Hopefully GSUSA, unlike the BSA, will listen to its members.

Current status. SPL has not followed through on his campaign promises when he ran. He's has not organized things, has not held a PLC since January when he attempted to run the Annual Planning Conference, which was taken over by the adults, and appears to have lost interest since when messaged, or called, he does not respond. Long story short ASPL, QM, and adults have taken over at times by assigning youth to teach.It is very frustrating and disappointing. Gunship wants to remove the SPL, who only has a few weeks left in his term. Here is where it is getting interesting. Gunship and a few

Considering how anal retentive National is about branding, I bet you a Death by Chocolate Dutch oven cake the next time you are in NC that this has been coordinated with national. I see this happening everywhere.

If I could upvote you 100 times, I would. We have 2 packs feeding us. Over the past few years, from one pack, everyone is staying. (10 for 10) But the other, has a 50% attrition. Out of 9 scouts who crossed over 12 months ago, 5 remain, and several of us are concerned we are going to lose 2 of the 5 still. And of the 3 who crossed over 3 months ago, 1 remains. I bet it would be lower if I could remember all the folks we lost from the other pack. And the difference is how the awards are earned. One pack makes them work for it, the other doesn't.

1) As others have commented, your pack is doing it wrong, way wrong, and it is hurting the boys. They know they have not earned their ranks. Their parents know they have not earned their ranks, and when they become Boy Scouts and must master the skills to advance, they and their parents will have an extremely hard time adjusting. I predict 1/2 of those crossing over will quit within a year. Why I say that? There is a pack locally that is lax with their advancement policies, and that is happening. The pack's Webelos are not prepared for Boy Scouts, and the parents are constantly hovering trying

I would look at the topic Shug Emery has done on his channel. Just remember there are somethings he does you should not, i.e. riding a unicycle with a lit stove. https://www.youtube.com/user/shugemery

That standard was in a powerpoint for early adopters. At the Cub level 2 adults over 21, one of whom must be a registered Scouter, can work with all boy dens, BUT one registered female over 21 MUST be in attendance at all functions of an all girls' den. Gotta love the double standard.

One troop I know plans on getting around the female scouter on camp outs with "family camping with their dad and/or brother." While they have not thought about meetings yet, bet they use "patrol meetings" to get around the meeting issue. One thing that hit me, will patrol day activities that currently do not require an adult now require one?

I'm sorry, I am taking things to personally of late..I admit the past 2 weeks have been stressful at work. I was hoping to have a relaxing weekend camping to bleed off the stress.That didn't happen and several things happened that made the stress worse. Again I apologize.

Since I believe below is addressed to me, I will give my responses. But my first question is this: Are you familiar with OA election procedures? In order to be on the ballot, a Scout must be First Class or higher, have 20 days and nites of camping, including one long term camp in the past 2 years, and must have the SM's approval. A SM can withhold approval for any reason he wants. BUT once the SM approves the names on a ballot, they are eligible to be elected. Then it is in the hands of the youth in a troop. And if the unacceptable Scout is elected, there is nothing the SM can do because he ha

That is why any issues, concerns, or problems a SM has with the Elections Team and/or Advisor need to be dealt with privately and calmly. I know I have had a few of those over the years. But when a SM starts yelling and berating the youth election team members, that is when an advisor needs to step in. And if a SM continues to make a public spectacle by yelling and berating the youth and the advisor who is trying to calmly and privately discuss the issue, then it is time for the OA election team to calmly leave like I did.

I guess this would be anecdotal, but here it goes. One of my Scouts had "delayed entry" into the air force. He could not get his EBOR in before basic training, and he turned 18 during training. Long story short, he comes back from basic, gets a BOR scheduled, and the night of the BOR, the district rep discovers that he missed the no questions asked deadline by 2 days, and he needed to appeal to national. They had a nice "chat" with him, wished him well on his appeal, and stated they will be more than willing to do an EBOR for him. He got Eagle, but by the time everything was approved and don

I had an SM try to intimidate my Arrowmen into taking off a name of a Scout he didn't think was worthy AFTER he approved it. It got very heated when I intervened. This happened to be the same SM w whom I found out rigged the election previously by telling the Scouts who to vote for so all three eligible could get in (back when there was limits on who could be on the ballot),

This is what causes problems: folks ignoring the procedures and doing their own thing. OA Election Team Should NEVER have added a Scout's name to the elected sheet simply because the SM recommends them. That is not how it is done. From personal experience, I know youth on an election team can get intimidated at times by adults. So my question is, where was the adult adviser to intervene on behalf of the election team?

IMHO, I an guessing someone at the troop/council royally screwed up, and the only way to resolve the situation was to get the national team to intervene.