Col. Flagg

You may have missed my point. We are talking able-bodied Scouts, not anyone who is disabled. We are talking about making accommodations across the board on a consistent basis. So if one denies the able bodied kid the use of goggle or an indoor pool to pass his swim test, one must equally deny the able bodied kid the "pass" if he cannot improve his pull up score after practicing for 12 weeks; or the kid who cannot cook an edible meal. See...I am "setting the bar" too.

I think if you define how you use the patrol method, as well as outline how the boys run the unit, the extent of "boy led" becomes evident.

Barry, one can argue for Scouters to fulfill their duty at camp AND require them to stay the heck out of the boys' hair. That's what good Scouters do. We are invisible...until we are needed, then we are right there.

Just for the sake of argument -- and please don't fall back on the "it's a life skill" stuff -- what about.... Communications MB: What about a Scout that cannot read well and does the swimming equivalent of struggling mightily through his COH script, missing words, making things unintelligible, misprouncing things and outright "drowning" figuratively. Does he get credit for having done the COH or do we hold him back until he learns to do "swim" through it? Cooking MB: What about a Scout who cannot even boil water? Do we hold him back until he's perfected his cooking technique to the poin

As much as we want kids to speak up, sometimes it is just easier (and safer) to lie low or leave. If there's no mechanism to, for lack of a better term, "blow the whistle" on the guys serving up this large bowl of crap, then boys tend to keep their head down. Or worse, they leave Scouting. I know a local troop that had this issue. The SM instituted a way to have guys let him know when such things were going on. Guys could send an email to a list that went to the SM and the TC Chair (two deep). The report was then investigated and acted on. It really cut down on issues. They also held a tro

We've also been to Venturing events where the competition was either with one's self or with their crew. Skeet comes to mind. One of our guys is a competitive shooter. Even as a Scout he didn't compete with his patrol. The kid simply never missed and HE was the one who said it wasn't fair. Competition is only good when everyone is playing by the same rules. Our unit ran camporee one year. The boys came up with the idea to provide all the gear needed to run an "event", including the directions AND to have "expert" advisors to help the units set up their event. The trick was, no one got thei

Adult patrols, IOLS that mirrors TFC, district award dinners that are 90% adult recognition and 10 youth recognition, bloated council recognition event, units doing MB and rank advancement work at meetings, MB colleges, tools guidelines, age-appropriate guidelines, etc. These are all things that either are focused on adults playing Scout or adult ideas thrust upon Scouts. Not saying you are doing them, but clearly BP's point of too much adult involvement being an epidemic in Scouting today *is* relevant. I can understand wanting to take it back. No, you can't take adults entirely out of Sc

In my area it was the intensity of the competitions, driven by adults, that turned off my troop. The mega troops in our area would get the program in advance as to what "games" were going to be offered; then they would practice them at meetings for months. These troops would even organize their patrols around the best Scouts at each event and enter them as a patrol. Talk about ringers!! It got so bad that our Scouts simply stopped going to events and just hung out at camp. I agree with @BackPack, my unit would rather just see demonstrations and participate than compete. Having spoken to t

@@Tampa Turtle, is it really a conspiracy to think that BSA -- with severely declining membership, rising costs and mounting debt -- saw opening their membership as a way to increase revenue? There's only a limited number of (legal) ways for a business to increase revenue. Increase sales, increase membership, increase donations, increase membership dues, increase prices. Only the last two does BSA have any direct control over and we've already seen the cost of dues go up. I suspect you will see a rise in gear soon as well. I've already noticed much of the bling is $1-3 bucks more than it was j

@@Hawkwin, I am going to let this just drop. You are missing the point and trying to make your own point using different data and arguments. That's actually the very definition of a straw man which has been pointed out. No matter. I will say this. The Census data shows that a majority of low income households have access to cell phones, TV, cable, DVD/DVR and internet. That's pretty clear data. Making any potential survey available online does not disenfranchise anyone, no more than lack of a car (but availability of public transport) makes access to Scout meetings a burden. If a poor kid

Wasn't the original cost of the Summit around $400m? And they took out a bond too with the local county (or through the local county). Don't recall the cost of that but I cannot imagine they are even close to paying it off. Looking at the link above it appears they expected to gain 125m/yr in monies toward Summit payments. Does not look like that happened either. If world jambo doesn't make huge money I suspect they will be near default on those bond payments. Makes one wonder where all those donors who held out for BSA to change policy have gone. Didn't read any large income coming in

Nothing is ever failure proof. Just ask Equifax.

If they are not tied to a BSA ID then they don't get access to the survey. That's what was used (BSA ID) for two of the three surveys I took.

Well, if "planning" and getting "approval" seem to be the only thing really unknown, then one would hope the SM would take that in to consideration and discuss that with the Scout and his parents. Find a common ground. Maybe he could draft another script and submit after-the-fact. Not ideal but is a middle ground. Another approach would be to conduct an interfaith service at a mtg in November. That wouldn't be too hard but to me that would essentially discount the fact he MC'd the COH. I'd hope the SM would be reasonable here. It sounds like a process may have been missed but it's min

I would agree with the advice given. I recently retired as SM and became a CA. It is *far* more laid back than the troop. I would also agree that the girls tend to be more interested in advancement than the guys; though most of our guys were also Eagles and, well, once you have done that there wasn't much reason to punish yourself any more. We are pretty active. We have three types of activities: Tier 1, 2 and 3. Think of Tier 1 like usual mtgs or events. Tier 2 is like a monthly camp out but can be other types of events. Tier 3 are big-time activities like treks and long-term (my term, b

Yet how many first year Scouts have their own iPhone or Galaxy or Google Phone? Another straw man argument. These kids have technology and can get email and access *IF* their parents help them. Getting a login or even simply using your BSA ID to input in to a website is easy. Most kids -- rich or poor -- in most areas have phones with Internet. Their schools have Internet. There are libraries and other places with Internet. The segment of the population, in Scouting that does not have Internet access is likely identical to the number of left-handed, blond kids that like strawberries....minuscu

This is a check and balance section to the GTA and not a 2nd approval. We all know of instances where MBCs have signed off on requirements we know could not possibly have been completed by the Scout. This section allows the unit, through the unit leader, to check that process against what the MBCs should be doing. If the MBC is signing off on stuff they could not validate (or didn't bother to check or "subtracted" from the requirements) then the SM is within BSA's stated guidelines to challenge that approval. Of course the word "challenge" is supposed to be done in an environment that give

I ignored those complaints from council. We go out of state for summer camp and rarely use local camps, but we do 1-2 service projects there every year and our OA guys go there to help often too. FOS we simply ignore and give lip service to. We donate used gear to needy troops and we do thousands of service hours at local food banks and other institutions each year. Council can complain all they want. In the end, we have a good program where the boys fulfill their civic obligation and raise their own money for their needs. Council can pass the hat elsewhere.

That was one example, Fred. The full text is: So if the SM (unit leader) finds out this kid didn't plan and get approved the COH, he would discern that from the conversation he has with the scout and observers (parent and an ASM). Then the GTA allows...

Pig issues? Wild hogs? Oh yeah. BUT those areas are pretty well known and we wouldn't let anyone go there. They are mostly in East and South Texas. I've gone on a few hunting trips to cull a few dozen from the population. Scary suckers and their hide is thick. Need "boar busters" to really drop the big ones. Back on topic, our guys know how to steer clear of them but we don't see them often. Bobcats and coyotes more than boars.

Why over-complicate it? Members only. Use your my.scouting login. One vote per member and they are on their honor to let the person registered vote their mind. One question: "Should BSA open Boy Scouts to girls?" I'm not a stats professor, but doesn't "margin of error" only come in to play when you take a statistical subset of a population? If so, then if you offer up the survey to all 760,000 registered Boy Scout members you wouldn't really have a margin of error would you? BSA has the capability to do this. We don't need a big, deeply-thought survey. The questions is pretty simple i

Yup. But then again I think we knew that was the case.

Margin of error is 3.27%...so the jury is out on that. At any rate, my second point is still true. One would expect that generation to be more progressive. Having a result land within the margin of error is hardly a resounding "in favor" proclamation (my words, no one else's). And yes, it could easily be 50.27% in favor as it could be 47.27% against. Point being, not resounding and certainly unexpected. Good point. I wonder if they see the move by BSA to be an eroding of GSUSA's purview, much like some here (I among them) think it is an eroding of Boy Scouting. That would be a

Is that $145 on top of the BSA dues and unit costs? That's one lazy council. What do they do if the unit does not submit tribute to Caesar?

Depends on where it is. If it is what could be considered "back country" then a whole set of new requirements pop up. If it is in a city park or state park, that might not require anything more than stated above (10 essentials, hiking plan, mode of communication, emergency plan, etc.). The GTSS outlines some of this, the rest is common sense, though I hate that phrase. What is "common" to some may not be to others. In our unit any water activities cannot be done without adult supervision and following Safe Swim/Safety Afloat guidelines. Hiking or cycling can be done without adult supervisi