Eagle94-A1

A few comments, 1) FYI Pros are suppose to contact the IH at least once a year to discuss their units. I also know a lot of DEs don't do that because "you have more important things to do waste your time talking to existing units" as my old boss told me. 2) I agree that calling an IH out of the blue and demanding an answer in a week is outrageous, especially since BSA has not provided enough guidance on the matter for some COs to make the decision. 3) I think this is happening a lot of places because my DE at RT the other day told me my son's pack will be coed, and the pack at my other sons' CO will also be going coed, and the CMs of both packs have not talked to the IHs yet.

Thanks for the links. For some reason, when I searched h for the instructor syllabus, the pre 2017 version came up. Looks like a major revision too. Going to talk to the SM about it because he took the course last summer, and didn't mention any basic vs river differences. So this may be the first camp season the revised course is being offered. Glancing over the requirements for river certification, I know some camps will have issues unless they go off site. I know the camp I grew up at a, as well as the camp I got the Aquatics Supervision Course at, does not have the river facilities to priovide certification unless goping off site.

Could you provide a link to the 2 levels of AQUATICS SUPERVISION:PADDLECRAFT because when I took the class, and attempted to get recertified, there was no distinctions. This was 4 and 2 years ago respectively.

THAT IS 110% ACCURATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Starting a unit to last is extremely hard. And getting a troop Scout led is not only harder, but also more time consuming, 3-5 years IMHO. When I was a pro, I started 6 units. Within a year 3 folded due to lack of volunteers. As for Rogue Packs and Troops, some folks against girls joining will say it is because of these Rogue Packs and Troops that we are now in this situation.

Actually from the survey we are taking, and the results are not final BTW, we have a diehard group for coed, and group with major reservations about going coed, and the majority not liking the idea of girls joining, but will deal with it. My own sons are in the latter category to a degree. If there are problems with cancelled trips due to not having enough female Scouters, they will transfer out. And I will not be going on any camp outs with girls unless a female ASM is present per my understanding of the proposed BSA policy. Your original question was " Isn't the BSA's core product a youth leadership and character-development program with an outdoor focus? Is that changing?" While girls are getting the bulk of attention now, Exploring and STEM Scouts preceded it, and in some areas ar egetting a lot more attention that traditional programs, again until girls were added. They do not have an outdoor component. As I stated, I am willing to give it a try. However I am not willing to go camping with girls unless a female SM, or a female ASM over 21 years of age, is also in attendance. i do not beleive that calling a camp out a "family camp out" with girls' dads in attendance would be YPT2 compliant. Not going to put myself into a position where an accusation can ruin my life as it did to a friend of mine when one "Scout" accused her of making a pass at him because she caught him being a peeping Tom at the female shower area. Despite a criminal investigation clearing her, her reputation was destroyed in the community, and she was permanently placed in the Ineligible Volunteer Files.

As long as the blade is under 60", it's OK. See this Official BSA website for information https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2013/04/01/blade-length/

Yes, outdoors.

Same here, especially since there is a demand to go full blown coed from some of the adults in my troop. When having a discussion about needing female Scouters on campouts , the response had been "turn it into a family camp out" if a female Scouter cannot go. Told my boys that I will not go camping with the "linked troops" without a female Scouter present.

Yes it is. Career Interest Exploring and STEM Scouts come to mind.

But look at the number of units that have ignored BSA policy of boys only for Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts over the past 40 years and how what they did is the policy effective June 11th for Cub Scouts and February 1st for Boy Scouts. call me cynical, but I foresee units ignoring BSA policy and going full coed. Heck my own unit has Scouters stating that the girls' troop will be on paper only. They will be "Linked Troops" sharing everything; equipment, meeting nites, camp outs, summer camp, and adult volunteers.

We already have reports from early adopters that some "Girls' den" and the "Boys' den" ideas is not working and that the two dens are doing "joint" activities.

If memory serves, and please correct me if I am not correct @ianwilkins and @Cambridgeskip, when The Scout Association went coed, you could have all male, all female, or coed. Over time there were fewer and fewer all male troops, and eventually everyone was forced to go coed.

But it may be considered a Webelos Den Camp Out. Again WHO KNOWS???????????????? (caps for emphasis, not shouting at you. )

Do not know what is going on with the CO's pack except the CM, who is stepping down at the end of the month, is all for it. Currently the troop is doing a survey of everyone affiliated with the troop: Scouts, parents, and Others (future Scouts, Scouters without kids, etc.). Results are not finished, but so far the ones for girls are adults. The overall majority is against girls, but will deal with them if the CO wants to go coed ( that is how we are reading "Linked Troops"). We do have some Scouts that said if the girls start interfering with their program, they will either transfer or quit altogether. Again very few are all for it. On a positive note, 5 females said they would be willing to become SM/ASMs of the "Linked troop." Hopefully they will be willing to get trained and deprogrammed from Cub Scout Leader mode. You may want to double check on that. My understanding from all the stuff I am seeing regarding YPT2 is that a registered female Scouter over 21 must camp when girls camp, parents do not count.

COs have a lot of authority since they own the units. COs can make stricter policies if they want. While they can give authority of Cub Scout leaders over Boy Scouts, I strongly do not recommend it. There are two completely different programs using trwo completely different methods. Most Cub Scout leaders do not understand Boy Scouts and how it works. And if the Cub Leader, or troop committee member for that matter, is not active with the troop, wear a uniform, etc , how would a Scout know that person is registered? Best example of that type of situation was a recent fundraiser. SPL gave directions to his PLs, and one PL was following through with them. All of a sudden an adult tells him to stop what he is doing and go back to work. A minute of two later I pass the PL and he is confused and asked me what to do. I asked him did he know who it was who told him to stop doing what the SPL told him to do? "No." then I asked was he in uniform? "No." Then do what the SPL told you to do.

Lots of good advice. Don't envy your having to make a decision. After my father left, I had to work. I was fortunate in that lifeguarding was fun. But if I could have staffed camp, I would have, BUt the pay was a heck of a lot better with the lifeguard job.

Awesome. Now I got this song in my head.

NO NEED TO APOLOGIZE!!!!!!!! It is a good to have it a a kneejerk reaction. And I bet you also bang your head everytime you tell folks and they ignore you or think they know better than BSA. At least I do.

@Oldscout448, You know that. I know that. Some of the other adults don't know it, or don't get it. It's been an uphill battle to get it more Scout led over the past 3 years. It seems as if we take steps forward, then backwards. @perdidochas SM came up with that since A) read about 3 month cycles on a blog and thought it was too short and B) Scouts could run for office outside of their sports seasons. Regaridng Advancement, the POR time can eb from multiple positions, i.e. 3 months SPL, 3 months QM. It was an adult decision, but some of the Scouts do like it. I agreed with it since I was getting what I think the troop really needed: monthly PLC meetings. Current SPL, PLs, and other office holders have a full 6 months as normal, for us until the end of May. Incoming group will hold office until September. Next group October -January.

Agree, I do not like the fact that PLs, Instructors, ASPL, SPL, and those assigned to teach skills cannot sign off. That was SOP in my troop growing up. It was also SOP for the PLs, ASPL, and SPL to sit on BORs, until national no longer allowed it in 1989. I was shocked when I found out that our first JASM would be allowed to sign off requirements. Now the other 2 JASMs can do it. One of the ASMs, in fact the Scout above's dad, was dead set against having Scouts sign off on requirements. Apparently when he was a Scout, he had challenges with the other Scouts not signing off his advancement when he demonstrated the skills. For the longest time he stated that the older Scouts do not know the skills well enough to teach them and sign off on them. I guess he changed his mind when his oldest was made a JASM.

Actually he isn't out to be a JASM. Sadly, JASM is not properly utilized in the troop IMHO. It is a "gimmee" or "muligan" position in which those who are coasting to Eagle get. They don't mentor, counsel, or advise anyone. Only real advantage to JASM in my troop is that they are the only Scouts allowed to sign off on advancement. PLs, Instructors, SPL, etc are not allowed to.

Actually I was referring to the Scout in question resisting advice and counseling and not my son. As for my my son resisting advice to appointing him APL, there is advice, counseling, and mentoring, versus coaching and dictating what you will do. I'll give you an example of the difference. Adults asking the PLC to come up with ways to fix the patrol problem is counseling, mentoring advising. Adults telling the PLC and Scout their terms of office is now 4 months,and instead of electing the SPL they will be electing the ASPL who will move up to SPL automatically is dictating. If my son wa asked to consider the Scout, that is one thing. But if it becomes you will appoint him APL, that is dictating.

Considering A) the announcement to change the election cycle from 6 months to 4 months surprised all of the youth and B) they also moved up the election a month so that the incoming PLC can go through "training" ( Not ILST but something an ASM is coming up with, don't ask not happy about it), several Scouts who had not considered running decided to run. Heck Middle Son was going to run unopposed, when someone said they would run at the last minute. But from his actions, from the way my son was describing it, he was more than a little miffed. And it wasn't just at my son, but his entire patrol.

@The Latin Scot I would compare the relationship between the Scout as APL and my son as PL to Monty and Ike. Monty tried to take over, tell Ike what to do, take credit for stuff Ike did until Ike one day had enough and reminded him that he was SHAEF and in charge. My son is pretty laid back, but one day did tell him he's the PL and they were doing things the way he said., @Gwaihir, I don't know about last night yet, but I know previous elections he was "upset" that neither his older son, nor this Scout has been elected to a POR. Older son has had the opportunity, but really doesn't seem to want the responsibility. In the past he was for term limits to "prevent the same people from getting elected over and over," and was one of the proponents of electing ASPL who moves to SPL. He was also for electing APL to move into PL, until I reminded him APL doesn't count for a POR and could actually hurt some Scouts, such as his son. That changed his mind about electing APL to move to the PL. He tried helping him previously when he was last PL, and the Scout was his APL, but the Scout didn't want his help. My son is at the stage of his Scouting career that he no longer needs a POR, but he is too young to be an JASM. But when no one else was able or interested in running against the Scout, he jumped in. He had major concerns about the Scout being PL. and @OldScout448, He dealt with it on his own once before. And things didn't improve. And the way the Scout was acting last nite, he has concerns about the Scout affecting the rest of the patrol. Plus there is the dad issue he is worried about. This is the same ASM who started to publically jump his case about doing things differently than what the troop has done when he was a Scout, but are not how things are suppose to be and I had to jump in. So because of the ASM dad, he wants to chat with the SM.

After last nite, I don't think my son is interested in helping him anymore to be honest. This wasn't the first time something like this happened. They took martial arts together years ago, and something the Scout did then broke the friendship up and they went their separate ways. 5 years later, he joins the troop and their friendship apparently was renewed. I think my son was planning to make him his APL again, he was my son's APL the last time he was PL, but refusing to shake his hand and the way he acted afterwards changed his mind.