curious_scouter

Start attending roundtable.  Meet the district committee.  In my experience - they will definitely have a way to use your energy.  It could be commissioner life.  It could be helping to plan a district event. 

I kind of "get" that local units are going to be a harder sell for a "stranger" off the street without a Scout of their own as at least an initial foot in the door.  But show up to district roundtable a couple times and you'll find yourself well employed soon.

You can bring value over a wider area in that kind of role (many units benefit from your energy vs. one) and you'll still have plenty of opportunities to get outdoors.

Another path could be OA if you're a member from your youth, a lot of lodges are thirsty for more adult participation and support.  It's another multi unit support option.

Thanks for your passion!

These fees are out of control.  There's no transparency or justification.  They bring no value to units or Scouts/Scouters. 

In an age where Scouts BSA is purportedly emphasizing DEI these fees  put Scouting out of reach for many.  It boils my blood. 

This all comes down to your local units and their established policies.  Issue with Scouting is it is generational.  Leaders and scouts come, engage for a time, and move on.  If a policy was not written down and passed on, it's often lost.  My advice is don't be afraid to rethink anything that's not specifically documented.  Even so, some of my least favorite words to hear are "That's what we've always done."  So?  Doesn't make it right.  Doesn't make it right for right now.  I don't think you need to reinvent the wheel for the sake of it, but I do think the generational rollover of Scouting leadership provides an organic opportunity to re-evaluate stuff like this.  My predecessor used to ask two questions when change was suggested:  "Does it make sense?"  "What problem does it solve?"  If it made sense and solved a problem, it was a good thing to look into.  If not - don't fix what's not broken is usually the best thing.

When you load an event in TWH, you can set a cutoff date for signup.  We normally make it the last meeting before the outing, mainly so the grubmaster(s) know who to shop for.  Nice thing is RSVPs are visible to everyone on the website.  I would say 95% of Scouts regularly use this.  Grubmaster SOP includes a final check of registrations for the Patrol right before the shop to account for late adds/drops.

When someone does not sign up and still intends to come, the Scouts seem to know.  I am 100% fine with last minute adds, I always prefer a Scout to come out with us than not over a "deadline".  As long as it can be safely accommodated (enough food, if we had to reserve canoes, etc.)  So far, and my experience is shorter than many, it's never been an issue to make it work for late adds.  Our policy on last minute drops is you are responsible for your share of actual costs.  If we paid the venue for your camping, if the grubmaster bought food for you, if we rented you a canoe and you no-show ... you're responsible for those fees. 

We have a decent size troop and a decent bench of registered adult leaders.  I still find from time to time I'm scraping by to get enough adult attendance at outings even with tons of advanced notice.  Mostly due to schedules.  Next year I worry it'll get worse with the new "fee required position" requirement but I'm working to get ahead on that.

All, looking ahead to next year we're beginning the uh... plan ... for the annual plan.  I found this Wikipedia article that lists all summer camps... found it useful:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_council_camps_(Boy_Scouts_of_America)

BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT OF THIS POST

I would like feedback, particularly (selfishly) for FL/GA/NC/SC/AL camps you definitely recommend and why.

But I thought this could be a refresh of generally useful feedback on camp destinations to put on our collective bucket list for next year or beyond.  So by all means, recommend any camp but as I mentioned... being selfish I am definitely looking for GA, NC, SC, AL based camp suggestions.

Our troop has attended camps at the following and feedback has been we're return to any of these.  Favorites would probably be Camp Shands for their awesome Tree House campsite (need to commit to filling 32 bunks to get entire site or Be Prepared to share) and Raven Knob which really was scenic and challenged us Flat Landers with terrain in a way we don't normally get confronted.  Bert Adams is also often touted, although was attended before my tenure so I can't personally comment on it. 

We are FL based and I feel the troop developing some wanderlust so we're looking in 2024 at doing one camp in council and a second camp out of state, hence my particular interest in hearing about GA, NC, SC, AL camps as most are driveable for us under the GTSS rules in a day.  Beyond that we're looking at flying or breaking the drive up into multiple days which complicates logistics - but does not rule out any given destination.

• Camp Shands (FL)
• Camp La No Che (FL)
• Rainy Mountain (GA)
• Raven Knob (NC)
• Daniel Boone (NC)
• Bert Adams (GA)

It's a good tool to frame up your thoughts and prep for the conversation but if advising a Scout on this I'd hold firm that

1. This section is specifically noted as not required.  Be prepared to talk about your experience.  I think the format of the section is great, worth using honestly.  But if you did not or decided not to, you cannot be required because...
2. Noone can add new requirements for Rank, including requiring you to provide a specifically unrequired part of this document and...
3. Though one reason for a board of review is to help ensure the Scout did what was supposed to have been done to meet the requirements, it shall become neither a retest or “examination,” nor a challenge of the Scout’s knowledge.  Therefore, being knowledgeable and conversant about what you did for the project and the planning ought to be sufficient.

In our council, the specificity with which they demand a candidate complete the application IMO borders on violating the "thou shalt not add requirements", for example in the merit badge section they will reject an application if the merit badges are not listed in the order earned by date.  As far as I can tell, this is not a requirement of the application or process and seems to be something done to make the review faster.  It's also to the point that non-electronic versions of the application (handwritten) are no longer practical - yet the GTA specifically says that's okay.

we use troop web host.  I post the outings in the calendar, scouts can sign up.  Usually after the event, the CC tallies up the receipts and uses the scout accounts feature of TWH to assess actual cost to the Scouts.  This varies a bit.  Pretty much everyone pays a split of the campsite fee if any, but then the food is done by patrol.  That way if Patrol A spends $15 per person and Patrol B spends $9 per person for food, the actual costs are passed along.  I like TWH.  In addition to just being able to post it, there are quick buttons for sending reminders to people who HAVE signed up and those who have NOT RSVPed (either yes/no) so you can nag just the people you want to and not the entire troop.  If someone says "Not going" they no longer get chatter about that outing via email.

I like it a lot.

We also use it to send a final confirmation of pickup time for Sunday.  There's a feature to route an SMS by email for most major carriers which is nice.

 have only used it for one unit, but Troop Web Host seems to have features in it for multi unit management.  Worth a look.

Better People.

On 2/19/2023 at 7:57 AM, qwazse said:

They are just making the registration fees more expensive for the rest of us.

This is likely.  Fair is fair though, if by this rule the # of paid leaders increases notably - the fees should decrease similarly.  They won't. 

On 2/18/2023 at 6:23 PM, Sentinel947 said:

Not entirely true. It ensures every adult that is camping overnight in a Scouting program is background checked. I'm curious if that came out of documented incidents, if that's one of the changes the bankruptcy process made happen, or it's a creative way to get more in fees, as you said. The BSA is rarely transparent about such things, so if there is actual data supporting the rule change, we'll never see it. 

This could have been done by restricting camping to only "registered leaders".  The decision to make it "fee required" seems intentional and if so, purely financially motivated IMO.  A MB Counselor, in my council at least, is required to take YPT and submit to a background check - but pays no fee.  Previously, these persons could attend outings and support my unit as one of the 2-up.  NOW, they would have to fork over almost $100 (fees for registered adults in my area are close to $100 annually now) AND be welcomed onto the committee or as an ASM (higher bar in my unit than MB counselor) so in addition to the financial barrier, there's a qualification and level of commitment barrier added too. 

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

So, at bed time, he just says "Goodnight folks! I'm going to sleep on my own in a campsite I rented for myself.  See you at breakfast!"

...because the kinds of parents that insist on observing are just this reasonable and level headed Unfortunately I don't view this situation as ad absurdum.  It's an eventuality.  I guess I'll cross that bridge as it comes, but Scouts BSA certainly do seem to spend plenty of time devising new and interesting ways to complicate our unit structures and YPT compliance.  This fee-required addition is one I can't get behind at all.  Accomplishes nothing net-new in terms of YPT, the only net difference I see is money in Scouts BSA's pocket.  Only hurts the units and the Scouts in my book.

I also wonder how this works in conjunction with the requirement that all aspects of the program be open to observation by parents or leaders.  If Mr. Dad demands to attend a campout to observe, does that FORCE us to take Mr. Dad onto our committee (whether we want to or not) just to permit him that right?  Or do we just say "If you insist, then your Scout cannot attend because you are unable to attend without being regsitered"

21 hours ago, PACAN said:

@mrjohns2....that's pretty cynical...loophole?  really?   MBCs have been "free"  for a long time and required to have YPT.  What's changed?

I was using this loophole as a way to "qualify" new ASMs and parents.  We have an influx of new scouts and parents.  The parents don't know me and my leaders, we don't know them.  But as soon as a parent comes into the picture I ask about their interest in outing participation.  If they have one, I first encouraged them to register as a MB counselor.  We need more anyway.  In our council this meant a background check, registration with Scouts BSA and YPT being recorded.  That established a minimum bar for my comfort level on youth safety for them to attend an outing.  Then I would invite them to attend a few outings, and eventually if they wanted to continue attending regularly (not TOO eventually) I'd say they needed to buck up and get into a unit registered position.  But by then we'd have a sense of where they best fit in our unit and the role they could play.

This was very beneficial. 

It allowed me to have a concentrated set of ASMs who were fully trained and most commonly attended (and always lead) outings but a larger bench of additional "reserve scouters" I could call on when needed.  A lot parents in my unit are like "I really can't commit to most outings or meetings, but once or twice a year I'd love to go if you need me".  Allowed me to use those people without saying "Great it'll be $90 a year"  Or like if we're going to do a huge pioneering project on a campout and I just need a few more adult hands.

There were also a few people who just did not pan out.  We took them on outings and we learned - it wasn't for them.  For whatever reason.  This "try before you buy" was a great method.  The COST of being unit registered is pretty high now just to go find out if you like camping with the unit. 

I will really miss having these options and predict it will lead to months where I'm required to cancel the outing due to lack of paid registered adults being available.  IMO this is not about youth protection - the MBC registration mandates that anyway and those people are allowed to meet with our youth regularly as part of the program.  I still view this as a money grab.

I use the left as often as I can.  Esp. for scout stuff.  As mentioned, on successful BOR, after a SM conf, any time a Scout approaches me as a Scout and I want to say "Great encounter".  All leaders line up at COH and congratulate the Scouts as the come up and use the handshake.  Thanks to covid, the left handed fist bump will often serve as a faster and more casual version in our unit now.  You'll see that a lot for things like when a patrol pulls off an especially great dinner, lots of left handed fist bumping in celebration.

It's nothing to be super hardcore about, but I think this scout-scout greeting is still a relevant part of our interactions.

On 2/2/2023 at 4:35 PM, qwazse said:

The "holy grail" app would be one that converts pictures of a signed and dated requirements into scout book entries.

believe, I've thought about it.  Should be possible honestly.  I mean... from a "can it be done" not a "will it be done" perspective.

On 2/3/2023 at 3:28 PM, Eagle1993 said:

1. Every rank will switch to 6 required adventures and 2 electives.  It is not clear if this is the correct #s; however, what was made clear is every rank will have the identical # of required & elective adventures.
2. Bobcat is no longer a rank, it will be an adventure that must be earned for every rank
3. Webelos & AOL will be completely separate.  Webelos will go to 1 year.  AOL will be full focused on bridging to scouts BSA and much more focus will be on linking AOL scouts to a Scouts BSA Troop.
4. If a scout earns AOL, when they cross over to Scouts BSA, they automatically earn Scout rank.

 

1 - don't care

2 - don't care

3 - Kinda like it

4 - Hard no.  Hate it.  Why?  Standard of advancement changes.  Unless they change it for AOL too.  Standard for completing in Cubs is "Do your best".  And most / many requirement say "With help if necessary".  I believe pretty strongly you need to know the Scout Oath and law to get your Scout badge.  It's not a huge lift from the standards of Cubs but it's a very important first step IMO to leaving "do your best" behind.

Good info in here, I do like the tips about viewing this as "selection" vs. "election". 

Another thing I'd like to share is around eligibility.  Don't rely exclusively on things like your troop's website for eligibility.  We had a few Scouts who had transferred to our troop in the past year, their camping history was not complete on our website so they were overlooked but eligible.  Caused a bit of a fiasco because the ballots were nicely pre-printed by the elections team based on what an ASM told them from the troop web host report.

Now, I'm having ASMs work to re-compile all camping history into Scoutbook with the hope and idea that it'll make it easier to have a consolidated record and should a youth leave our unit for whatever reason we've done them a potential favor in that the activity follows them on Scoutbook vs. getting stuck on our TWH subscription.

Looking for actual experience from unit leaders on how they have let College Reserve Scouter scouters participate and especially any links to actual materials on the topic from Scouts BSA.

This year we'll have 7 Scouts who turn 18 between Jan 2023 and May 1, 2023.  They have not yet started college, but most will head that way in August/September 2023.  Several have asked me about registering as College Reserve.

I'm open to it.  They were all great leaders as Scouts, could certainly continue to be a value to our program.  I'm challenged because I can't find much guidance, outside of the obvious "must train and follow YPT as an adult", about how to set expectations about their future participation. 

I think the people asking me about this role are thinking this is a way to keep attending campouts and hanging out with their buddies who are still in the program.  For example I was asked by one "Could I still camp with them, just not share a tent."  So I want to be crystal clear with these newly minted adults about how it would work, right up front. 

I love Scouting.  I love that they love it and want to continue doing it.  I love the friendships they made as a youth are so strong they don't want to give it up yet.  I love that it kills them their just-recently-fellow-scouts are out camping this weekend and they can't be there with them.  So I really want to say "Sure!".

But I don't think that's the idea behind CSR, sadly.  I think by design scouting as a youth is a time-limited engagement and as depressing as it is, we all have to close that chapter when we turn 18.  If you want to keep hanging with your buddies and doing SCOUT stuff with them - a venture crew is how you do that and why we allow you there until you're 21 to operate as a "Scout" and not a "Scouter". 

If you want to assume the role of an adult leader but can only do it on occasion due to college responsibilities, CSR is here for you.  But when you participate in that role it's as an adult leader - not an extension of your youth experience.  You do what the other adults do on an outing in our unit:  Make yourself available, but scarce.  Cook, clean and camp with the adult patrol... not your former patrol across the way.  When your former Patrol goes out on some activity, you would not normally go with them "for fun" but only if your attending fulfilled some supervisory need for the activity. 

Yeah loss/damage of a book happens.  Our SPL announces "Everyone, take pictures of your book tonight" at the first meeting of every month for this exact reason.  The adv chair also snaps photos at every BOR and attaches them to the note in SB for the BOR so they are preserved.  It's better than nothing and avoids a full rebuild.

Also an advocate for paper book.  In our unit that's the official record. 

Today SB is updated by our adv chair after a successful BOR but does not include the individual requirement dates - only the BOR is updated.

We have a handful of newer Scouts and families entering progress directly.  You need to set expectations with them.  As many are coming in from Cubs, their belief is they are "signing off" on the requirement by doing that.  They get frustrated to find out later it's really just a "heads up" the Scout is ready to test on those.  They still need to meet with someone in the unit authorized to sign off on requirements.  But.. if you can get ahead of expectations I think it's really handy to be able to see the actual progress of the troop online at a glance.

I'm a data driven guy.  Someone has volunteered to start loading Scout-->First class status into SB for us time to time.  This will help us because we can then pull reports from SB and find out like "23 Scouts need this specific requirement".  The PLC can use that to plan meetings and outings that have more impact.

Because MBs go straight into SB we have been able to do this kind of report for Eagle Required badges.  That's helped the PLC as well as the leadership.  It's been helping us to help scouts avoid panic later "Hey buddy, you have like 10 eagle required badges left to finish and you're getting older.  Might want to knock off 3 or 4 at summer camp this year and keep your eyes open for other chances to get them done."  It's been very beneficial, just that bit of "hey buddy" has been enough to encourage some good decisions and proactive action.

wow!

I don't feel like transparency and pragmatic measures are mutually exclusive.  In fact, to borrow your phrase the only acceptable position these days is that Youth Protection comes first. 

If you as a parent feel obligated to observe and are unwilling to take the most basic Youth Protection steps - then I am sorry.  The protection of all the other youth is as important as your youth and I must decline your attendance, and therefor your Scout's.  I will not let anyone who has not minimally taken YPT attend an outing with our Troop.  If that person intends to attend regularly, I require them to get registered so we have the benefit of insurance, background check, and formal YPT tracking.  Under no circumstances would I just let someone walk in off the street and attend an outing where they have hours of potentially unsupervised access to the youth of my troop with no training.  That would be negligent IMO.

Maybe a bit more back on topic... how have your units handled this scenario:

New scout joins, often via crossover from cubs but sometimes as they move into town from away.  Parents want to join us on a few outings.  On the one hand as a parent - I get this.  I don't really care how much training and YPT a bunch of adult volunteers have had... I'm going to find it very difficult if not impossible to get comfortable with the idea of sending my child off into the outdoors with a bunch of people I don't know at all.  On the flip side, my established leadership is not wild on the idea of unregistered adults who could end up not understanding/espousing the idea of letting the Scout do and being "helicopter parents".  I get this also.

My compromise thus far has been 1) require YPT to attend 2) meet with said parent to set expectations, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they are adult humans and if I express my expectations and desire for adult behavior on an outing they will respect that.

I'm too new to know how naive this is