HelpfulTracks

Yeah, about O/A, I'd rather they drop the rhetoric, open it to male venturers, but plainly say "no girls allowed."

#tiredofdoublespeak

I don't see how it is double speak. it's perfectly clear. A male Venturer is not eligible either. Neither are Cub Scouts, Explorers or STEM.

And women are most certainly allowed, IF they are Boy Scout Leaders.

Demonstrate Scout spirit by living the Scout Oath and Law is requirement for advancement. Rank is not a participation trophy, it requires work and meeting standards.

I have had parents challenge me on that, but once I sit down and talk with them and their son, they back me. The Scout almost always improves. Only one parent has failed to get on board, unfortunately I rarely see that Scout anymore.

Another option, since the parents are "rolling in," I assume they are not volunteers. Hand them an application, tell them what leaders are required to do (particularly the parts about living by the Scout Oath and Law and to help ALL of the Scouts, not just their son), get them trained and hand them a job or two. People tend to complain less about things they don't understand when they have learn what they don't understand AND have skin in the game. Not to mention, it is amazing how little time they will have to complain when they are giving an "hour a week."

Miss Ireland's story is a curious one that I have had reservations about since I first heard it sometime back.

First, her focus seems to have changed over time. In earlier articles I read, her focus was primarily, if not entirely, focused on her desire to be an Eagle Scout. That as a goal for any Scout is admirable, but when I hear that as the primary or only reason to join, then I have to wonder how much the Scout really wants to be a Scout versus pad a resume. As her father seems to be quoted in one article (the article is poorly written so its difficult to be sure), that leaders come from earning Eagle. I believe leaders earn Eagle, to me a not so subtle difference.

Second, in one early interview she said she has never even tried to join GSUSA and that she doesn't know much about it. Then how does she know what GSUSA in her area offers? It would seem that NYC would have a good many GSUSA Troops, surely one fit her needs, and if not her family clearly has the means and drive to start one. After all, traveling over 500 miles routinely to be a member Scouts Canada would seem far more time and money intensive than starting a GS Troop that fit you needs.

Third, based on her statements I am pretty sure she is not in Venturing. Again, that would seem to be the first place to start, even if you still wanted to have Boy Scouts opened to girls. If your goals are the skills and leadership that BSA offers, then Venturing has that too.

Finally, Miss Ireland is already 16. Within the next few months, if she hasn't already, she will cross a time line that will make achieving Eagle Scout impossible. But I keep hearing about what she has already done in Scouting, like "earning merit badges," and "serving as Patrol Leader." I have a gut feeling that an effort will be made to allow her to "earn" Eagle via waivers of some type.

Perhaps I am wrong on all counts, maybe someone else can enlighten me.

  Wow, way to resuscitate an old thread.    We never did hear back from   onetallmama, did we?    Guess we scared her  off with our encouragement as to how to work her group....

Don't think anyone scared her off. By the looks of it she posted and never came back. Her last activity is 4 minutes after she posted.

Maybe her issue was resolved, or she just needed to vent.

Here's a change that should be considered - open up OA to female venturers - their female leaders can become members, they should be able to as well

No female, or male, Venturer or Venturing Advisor, can be elected or nominated to The Order of the Arrow.

If a female Venturing Advisor, is also a member of a Troop (registered adult leader) then they may be nominated by their Troop. The same is true or males and youth, they must be registered with a Troop or Varsity unit and elections and nominations may only come from those units. 

@@HelpfulTracks Utah is actually home to no less than 4 councils, and they are among the largest and most active in the BSA. There are also huge councils in other areas with large LDS populations, such as California, Idaho, Arizona, and Wyoming. But it is a mistake to think that the Church only looks at what goes on in Utah. We are a global Church, with almost 16 million members in more than 160 countries, and every one of them matters. Thanks to meticulous organization of leadership, the young people in Canada receive as much attention as the members in Venezuela or Mongolia or Nigeria or the Ukraine. So you can be sure that the Scouts in Canada are getting all the attention they deserve in this regard.

I was merely pointing out that there are about 60K Scouts in Canada. There are about 5-6 Councils in the U.S. with larger scout populations, of which 2 are in Utah. In that light I didn't think that Scouts Canada would be a good barometer for how the LDS Church might react to co-ed scouting.

Your facts are mistaken about the Venturing program - the Church has never at any point chartered or endorsed Venturing units for girls. We have our own programs for girls and young women that we have run for more than 120 years, so we have never had any need to include them in any of Scouting's programs.

My mistake. However, I have received that information from several members of your Church. Comments on several sites, including LDS.org seem to validate that in at least some circumstances YW are in Venturing.  

If, however, Scouting were to cave to popular pressure and make their core programs (Cub and Boy Scouts) co-ed, it could be one of the last straws for the Church's involvement with Scouting. The Church has been remarkably patient with Scouting's changes up until now. The pull from Varsity and Venturing actually had nothing to do with any changes in Scouting, but rather happened because local leaders weren't implementing the programs correctly and so we were wasting resources on programs that weren't being properly used. But we have kept Boy Scout and Cub Scouts because they fit with our needs and ideals. If they were to collapse their values and ultimately make those programs co-ed, however, then it would be the time to wonder how long the Church would continue with the programs.

Which brings me back to my original question of how you think the LDS Church would respond to the potential changes of parallel tracks or possibly coed scouting.

Initially, I was assuming that how LDS Scouting functioned in Canada would provide no insight as to how the Church would react to changes in Scouting here in the U.S.

But your response that each country matters, makes me feel it might.

Not a fan. Allow me to explain. While giant structures, arches, gates etc... are "fun" I think too often these become the focus take away from the main purpose of pioneering. Rarely are the giant towers and trebuchets the product of boys ideas and work, and for the most part are not useful. IMO the main purpose and focus of pioneering is to make camp life easier by having the ability to make gadgets, and useful (small) structures so one dorsn't have to transport everything from the trailer. I use lashings on almost every trip, even if just to make a tripod to hang the pot over the fire. I often make a quick camp chair, and sometimes a small table. I suppose when one takes the trailer and never is more than 100 yds from it the need for pioneering skills on a campout are diminished. So, I am not in favor of this proposal as I see it as encouraging the giant structures at the expense of focusing on what I see as the real purpose of pioneering when there is already a dimished focus on that purpose.

DuctTape, I would agree that fundamentals of pioneering must be first and prominent in any pioneering training.

However, I would argue the FUN is absolutely one of the real purpose for pioneering and huge reason Scouts keep scouting.

Character building, teamwork, critical thinking, problem solving and building are also important and real purpose for pioneering. Something larger project make easier.

A completely useless project that my troops scouts came up with one a rafting trip last year is still the "stuff of troop legend" and regularly talked about. After a day of rafting the adults settled down in their camp and the scouts in their camp some distance away. With a an hour or so of daylight left one of the scouts scurried into camp and told the adults the scouts needed them down at the river bank. Upon arrival the adults saw a homemade raft the scouts had put together using wood, bamboo and rope. They managed to get 4 scouts on the raft and pushed off, floating downstream to the cheers of the adults, their fellow scouts, and most importantly to them, strangers/rafters who where camped just down stream. They did this all on their own, with wood they found and the skills of a couple of scouts who are pioneering nuts. The story is still told in the troop to new crossovers each year, as if they had conquered Mount Everest. The scouts routinely want to do pioneering project and bemoan the fact they can't do more bigger and better project. Even more true now that several of them went to Jamboree and saw what CAN be accomplished.

Personally, if the scout want to do more and bigger and better projects because they are fun, that is reason enough for me to find a way to make it happen.

Thank you all for you feedback.

Pioneering has always been something, in my opinion, that scouts loved. Anything we can do to make it more accessible is indeed "golden."

Thank you John-in-KC, I will ping RichardB

I understand there are risk management issues involved with many of the rules surrounding pioneering, but in my youth pioneering was one of biggest draws for scouts and we were able to build some fantastic permanent and semi-permanent structures; towers, gateways, rope bridges etc. that we actually used. I would love to see scouts being able to do pioneering the way we used to do it in my youth.

I am going with the assumption that the rules for pioneering will not be loosened, so I am looking for the next best solution.

With approval from the council risk management committee you can still build structures over the 5ft standard. (I believe that is the current standard). Getting the right people out to approve such structures is difficult or impossible to accomplish for smaller events or unit outings. For some councils it is even difficult for larger events. As a result you do not see the amount or level of pioneering I remember from my youth.

If there was an opportunity that would allow scouters to be trained and certified in building and assessing risk of larger pioneering structures I think we could get back to the glory days of pioneering and maintain the safety/risk mitigation that BSA desires.

I would like to get some feedback from Scouters in this forum on that concept.

TIA for you help.

HelpfulTracks

Our council is a registered ECSI Education Center, and has trained and qualified instructor(s) in council as well.

My son and I took WFA last Spring from the council and cost $35/scout(er), which included WFA and CPR/AED. The cost was basically what the book cost to purchase at full retail (you can find it cheaper), so it was extremely good value. More so when you consider that organizations around us are charging $200 or more.

BSA is requiring WFA certified individuals for high adventure and some back county outings now, so if your troop is participating in those as a troop you will need it.

A unit may also become a certified education center as well, as long as you have volunteers with the proper training and credentials and meet ECSI requirements.

The Latin Scot - I interested in the Scouts Canada's coed policy and how the LDS Church viewed it as well.

Of course Utah has a single council, maybe two, with more members than Scouts Canada has enrolled. So I am not sure if it even enters the LDS thought process.

My understanding is that before LDS dropped the Venturing program, they did have girls in venturing in single gender crews, just no coed crews.

What are your thoughts on the actions the LDS Church would take if BSA were to bring girls into to Scouting through parallel single gender units, or to allow CO's to choose parallel or integrated units? DO you think the LDS Church would pull out of Scouting all together?

We have a committee member who insists that we need at least 4 adults to go on hikes in case a group needs to turn around due to injury so that we ALWAYS have 2 deep leadership. I say, what if another scout gets injured in the lead group and they need to turn around? Maybe we need double the number of adults to scouts on each and every outing. You know, just to be safe. 

A day hike (or any non-overnighter) by a patrol does not require an adult at all if the SM approves.

The show was awesome. We had 2:32 of totality. Crystal clear skies. Pictures do not do it justice. Things went much smoother than expected and we had about 750 in attendance. Scouts from as far away as NJ and Michigan were on hand. My son and I worked the event and I was worried that we would not make it to the Pinnacle in time to join the rest of our family. But everyone headed up from the events early so there was no problem. Looking at a black moon over the sun was kind of surreal, the 360 sunset was amazing. The light just prior to and after the eclipse was kind of strange, and hard to explain. We saw the beads too, but not the shadow snakes, not sure why.

It was an incredible family experience as I watched it with my wife, son and daughter.

The traffic afterwords was what we expected, a nightmare. It took 3 hours to cover what we normally do in 1 hour.

An Eagle with no palms indicate that the boy did just enough to get Eagle.  If he were to earn MB palms along the way, it would show that he did more than just the minimum, too.

 Just enough to get Eagle?

If he met the requirements and passed BoR, an Eagle is an Eagle, 21 merit badges or 121.

I know a number of Eagles that have no palms, but did plenty of Scouting, myself included. Our last 6 Eagles all made it right before their 18th birthday. They had maybe 200 MB's between them and no palms (except for the last 2 that fell under the new rule). Earlier this year one finished is second term as SPL just before getting Eagle (no palms as he was under the old rule). The last two Eagles attended Jamboree just a few weeks before their 18th birthday, and one of them served on Summer Camp staff the last 3 years. (both get palms because their BoR's were after August1.)

I had over 50 MB's, no palms because after turning Life at 15 I finished my project the month before my 18th. As life I attended 2 high adventure bases, held multiple PoR, including 2-3 stints as SPL, served in OA, (I attended Jambo just before turning Life).

The point is palms are not a measure of an Eagle. Of all the Eagles I have met over the years, the topic of how many palms they earned has never come up.

I used to not give palms much thought. On occasion, I thought it would have been cool to have a couple, but it never bothered me that I didn't. I thought of it as an award, like 50 miler, Paul Bunyan, Historic Trails and World Conservation.

I don't have an issue with the rule change, but with all the nashing of teeth over the change and parsing out Eagles based on palms, I almost wish they would do away with it, or at least find a way to detach it from Eagle Rank. I think that to much emphasis is being put on palms and what they mean, particularly compared to other awards like Hornaday and NMOA, both of which require a great deal of effort to earn.

I was an SM for a Jambo troop. I and my scouts had a great time. When asked, all 36 said they would do it again.

Where there issues? Yes.

Theft, yes. Any theft at a scouting event is disappointing, (yes, that is Pollyanna). So clearly there was too much. But I would say that 1/3 -1/2 of the "theft" turned out to be misplaced. I cannot tell you how often I heard, "Yes sir, I found it under my cot (and I suspect a large pile of dirty cloths).  The AT&T stations made for hassles, as scouts stole the charging cables. Occasionally some scout would put his phone on a charger and leave it there, come back later and it was gone. I encouraged our parents to get them charging blocks and solar chargers, which made out life much esier because we didnt have to deal with theft as much. The troop did lose a single phone. We did lose a couple of charging blocks that were left unattended at charging stations.

We also had some rock throwing incidents from scouts sitting at charging stations, fortunately no one was seriously hurt. A few tents got damaged.

Food. Frankly it was much better than I expected. A good bit of that I will contribute to my 2nd ASM and QM. They did a great job of planning meals, getting up early everyday and getting down to the commissary. We always had plenty of food, a pretty good selection and fairly tasty. My biggest complain was everything was processed, so my salt intake shot up. But other than that nothing major to complain about food wise. We did have some issues with the process of getting the food, but as I understand it, each sub camp was a little different, so they could test different ways of doing things.

Patch trading. Yes, there were some obnoxious and UN-scoutlike traders. Being an old patch trader, I coached our guys on just moving on if you got that attitude or crazy demands. There were plenty of other people to trade with. I even took a few of them out to coach them in the "pits". I also "brokered" some deals for some scout with adults, since they were not allowed to trade with each other. IN all they learned a good bit about trading, had fun, came home with some cool patches and most importantly did not spend an inordinate amount of time trading.

Sexual aggression issues. I never saw that. We were in Delta and the closest troops to Foxtrot (were the crews and international scouts were based). We had a fair amount of interaction with Foxtrot and never had any issues of a sexual nature. Some of our younger scouts had siblings, some just wanted to meeting foreign scouts and some of the older ones knew there were girls up there, lol. Our 3rd ASM is still a Venturing Scout,s o he knew several people up at Foxtrot and took some scouts with him a few nights. I went up a couple of times. There were some aggressive patch traders, but that was about it.  But there were also some very generous scouts there as well. I ran into a crew from Liberia on the wait for rafting and we talked for a while. They gave me this beautiful neckerchief slide made from a native tree. I had nothing with me at the time to give them, but insisted I take it. They seemed very happy when I was able to track them down at Foxtrot and gave them one of our council patch sets. Those are great memories.

We had a great time at Jamboree, and while it is expensive, our proximity makes Jamboree a little less expensive than going to the High Adventure bases (unless they do the OA crews).

I would recommend Jambo, the upside beats the downside by a mile in my opinion.

Hopefully Helpful Tracks

I agree it's not a cure all.  But it's unreasonable to not expect questionable behavior when most scouts are in an all male scouting experience and then attend a co-ed Jamoboree.  Civility is not what it was.  Perhaps it should be a new focal point. 

I respectfully disagree. If these young men belong to a program where they are held to the standards they recite a few times a month, they wouldn't act like that. If these young men were held to higher standards at school or in their home, they wouldn't act like that. If these young men had a stronger spiritual influence in their life, they wouldn't act like that.

 

Let's face it, these kids don't act like this because they were in a single-sex environment and suddenly were thrust in to a coed environment. I'd buy that if they lived on a single-sex planet, but they don't. They go to school with girls, they go to the mall or water parks and see girls all the time! 

 

This was little boys not being held to the standards they claim to aspire to. This was adults hiding behind the "boy led" mantra and not getting out and making sure their guys were acting like human beings. These guys know better, they just elected to be tools. Coed is all around them in their daily lives and it had no impact on their behavior. They simply thought they could get away with it.

^^^^^^^^^^^ This! I completely agree.

The argument that making scouting co-ed because the scouts need to be exposed to co-ed environements is always one I have a problem with. Because.....

1. Our youth (at least my son and most of the scouts I deal with) are in more co-ed activities than single gender.
2. The Scout Oath and Law, if it is being taught and lived by, would preclude this behavior at all times.

I hear the argument that scouting is the best (or only) place can get X or Y.  My question is always then why not change other organizations to be like scouting, rather than change scouting to be like all those other organizations they say are failing to achieve was scouting does for boys. I have yet to hear a convincing argument.

That is awesome! I remember reading/hearing about an Eagle project that did something similar with pets. Bringing together scouts working on Pet care MB, and I believe it was cancer patients.

If the advancement chair keeps advancement records, and many do, or was a source on advancement requirements, which she may be, the Scout might be checking up on something>  Or the Scout might be asking about scheduling a Board of Review.  And it would be another exercise in contacting an adult.

True, particularly for the Scribe, who should be helping maintain advancement records, and Librarian who should be maintaining the requirements via the library.

It is the CO, through the unit committee, that is charged with seeing that BSA program is being furnished,

While I agree, I would argue that should be done through the CC to the SM, who is responsible for the program.

First, is his management style having a negative impact on the youth in the troop? If so, you need to address it. But if the youth are having a good scouting experience (boy led, advancing, camping etc.) then don't upset the apple cart because he has a style of management that may be unorthodox.

If you think the troop is suffering, then.......

The SM is responsible for managing the ASM's.

However, you as CC, the SM reports to you.

If the troop is suffering you are responsible for making a change.

That change may mean sitting down and talking with the SM about what the troop needs and its goals. You may need to help in developing a plan to reach those goals.

It could be that after 25 years, you need a change in the SM. Perhaps the SM will see that on his own, perhaps you need to suggest it. Or you may even need to force it.

Three things:

1. No job in scouting, NO JOB, is a lifetime appointment. Not the CC or the SM or anyone else.
2. The troop, how it functions, everything about it, is for the boys, not the adults. If there is a negative impact on the youth then whatever is causing that issue needs to be addressed.
3. If you have a good program for the youth, that is what matters, not the style of management (as long as it follows BSA poicy). Don't tinker with a good troop just because some disagree with the SM's style

YPT was not a requirement for Boy Scouts for Jamboree in 2017 by National. Nor is it a National requirement for NYLT. I have not seen any literature that any High Adventure base requires it for Boy Scouts either, but it may exist. All of the above could have been required by specific councils I would imagine.

Seems odd that youth would be required to take YPT for any reason. I do think it is a good idea that they understand it however, both for the scouts and the adults protection.

At a recent troop meeting, the SM announced that scouts are expected to call him (not email or text). If he does not answer, he is not expected to return their call -- they are expected to keep calling until he answers.

 

At the same meeting, our advancement chair asked that scouts call her home phone (not cell) and leave a voicemail including a phone number.

Hmmm. SM sounds like he is saying my time is important, yours isn't.

Why would a scout be calling an advancement chair? I see no reason for that.

As for how we do things.

Call - have someone else on the line, if you leave a message I'll call back as soon as I can, with someone else on the line with me

Text - group text only - no one on one

Email - cc someone else.

Had a great time with my son at Jamboree.

Just had our OA lodge 75th Anniversary Celebration

My son was elected Lodge Vice Chief.

Headed out tomorrow with my family for the councils eclipse event at local scout camp.

 I have been as a youth participant and as a Scoutmaster for a troop with my son. Now I hope to go to both World in 2019 and National in 2021 as staff. My son and daughter both want to go as part of a Crew to World, and my daughter wants to go to the next National. My son will be in college by then, but has not ruled it out. My son had a great time this year and my daughter is envious.

I love Jamboree, it is crowded but it is also an awesome experience.

blw2 - may I make a suggestion? That is if you still want to give scouting a try.

Based what you have said, you son has friends in the troop, possibly his patrol.

Have a patrol day outing, away from the troop. Let the boys decide what it will be, a backyard cookout, bike riding, swimming, whatever......if they plan it, or make it up as they go, they will likely have fun, and if you son is having fun, I bet you will too. Maybe mix in a few scouts from another patrol, particularly if you son's friends are in those patrols.

Are you are a registered scouter, or are friends with one in the troop? If so, after a few good day outings, get the boys to plan an overnight. Again, whatever they want (as long as it is within BSA policy).  The boys will start to figure out that they can make the troop just as much fun and start stepping up to do that. Just be ready to have their back if they get adult push back. A simple "let the boys have a shot at things there way" will probably work. Odds are your son is not alone in the way he feels about the troop. So if a enough of them start to figure out how things should work, then they will start to make changes.

For my son it was OA that opened his eyes. He was having fun with the troop, and we (adult leaders) were trying to move the troop toward boy led. But they were just not catching on (likely our fault, not theirs). But OA showed him what boy led really meant. He took that lesson back to his troop and it spread like wildfire. It really just takes one or two scouts to start moving things in the right direction, others will follow if they see they are having fun. If you have some stubborn adult leaders, you may need to step up and help them make their case, but boy led is the BSA way, so there really isn't an argument against it.

That said, scouting just not what some boys want, and that is okay too. If scouting isn't for him, help him explore other options.

Hopefully Helpful Tracks