HashTagScouts

If the weekend was just families, who mostly (or even all) happen to be cub scouts but it wasn't actually a pack or den planned weekend, then absolutely no. it would be like counting your sons nights if it was just your own family that went camping at the state park. If these kids were there and did anything to show leadership- even if it was helping the cubs to start their campfire, teach a knot, etc. I would approve myself. As others point out, you have the final say on whether the scout has meet the 20 night requirement or not, no one from your lodge is going to ask for records, so trust your own gut on this. The "standards of the Boy Scouts of America" only applies to the long-term camping requirement- that's to say we wouldn't count the nights a kid spent at the private Camp Lackawanda that is more like a resort than a BSA summer camp.

I agree- I have never met an Eagle candidate that didn't have to make adjustments to their plan once they started the project. Having them take a stab at it beforehand can be the best tool to mentor them on what may become an issue, if done as is, when they begin work.

I appreciate your opinions. For me, as long as we are absolutely committed and preaching respect, I have no issues with the ceremonies. I take more objection of using names like "redskins", which is a total racial slur, or "fighting Sioux" (both the implication that NA are merely savage warriors, and that the term Sioux was appropriated from another NA group and used to refer to the Dakota/Lakota/Nakota peoples as snakes). I've been fortunate to make connections to a number of NA peoples in my lifetime, many are like me that they have exceptionally mixed ancestry, but also quite a few that are fully Native American/Native Alaskan. Generally I have found that few take offense to using true NA terms to name campsites or camps. And for those who I have explained what the OA is and what it borrows from Lenni-Lenape lore, I've never really heard anything negative about it. Many still see the BSA as wholesome and striving to do good in the world (the "what are you, some kind of Boy Scout?" type of thing), so that helps so long as we continue to stay true to that.

I don't think your SM is trying to be an obstacle. The explanation I can offer that is probably what he is getting at, but possibly not explaining explicitly- there is a lot of issue that can arise when two scouts are working on projects concurrently at the same location. If scout #1 is say building a handicap ramp as an element of his project, and scout #2 is pouring footings and building the deck/landing that the ramp from scout #1 is going to connect to, the ultimate question is who is really providing the planning and/or leadership? In other words, there is the perception that scout #2 is doing something that is necessary and intrinsically linked to scout #1's project, so therefore scout #2 was doing something that scout #1 should have done. Remember, those who are going to be on the EBOR probably know little to nothing about the youth, nor the beneficiary, and are relying on the scouts to explain what happened and how they performed. My son and another scout from his troop did projects that were for our church. The other scout had started his over a year before my son, and part of his project was rebuilding a ramp on the parish hall. Part of my sons project was rebuilding a set of stairs on the parish hall. Both the ramp and the stairs were attached to different sides of a stonework landing that neither were doing any work to. When my son went to the district advisor to present his project plan, he was explicitly asked if the stairs physically was attached to the ramp- and that if the answer was yes, then my son either had to wait until the other scout had completely finished his project and come back and present again, or find something else to do for the reasoning in my example above.

Having NA ancestry, I can understand the sensitivity (and I am thankful for it really) on the history of treatment towards Native Americans. Bringing awareness of it should be a part of any presentation of anything NA. I very much appreciate @qwazse stating "There is a difference between making money off someone's history and legends, and inspiring greatness through honoring someone's history and legend." and I am very enthusiastic towards anyone, OA or not, to take the time to seek out local NA groups and learn about their culture and history. For many NA groups today, they are challenged to educate their youth to keep traditions and language alive, and most are very welcoming to non-NA individuals to share their knowledge with them. However, let's keep in mind one very important thing- the OA is representing the story of Lenni-Lenape traditions. Yes, it is subjective on who gave the telling of those traditions, and how they were interpreted into what became the ceremonies that the OA uses- however, the only formal establishment that is continually needed as to whether the OA, in whatever part of the world it exists today, should continue to use the Lenni-Lenape traditions is up to the Lenni-Lenape. If you are a lodge in say Kansas, your interpretation of the ceremony should still be through the lens of the Lenni-Lenape, not the NA group in your area. Even the regalia used should be based on Lenni-Lenape. I appreciate the sensitivity towards other NA groups, and it would seem very un-scoutlike if we weren't considerate of their feelings. I wish I knew how much effort and discussion was going on between the OA and the modern Lenni-Lenape descendant groups, and how they truly feel (or how much they could help us to be more true and honorable to this story). Personally, I think it should be required after the Ordeal ceremony for every new member to hear the legend told in a sit-down, here's what it means way, sans regalia and the dramatic element just such that the context of it, that it is an interpretation of one specific NA group, is soundly understood. The whirlwind that is the Ordeal weekend today, from my experiences, doesn't truly do that, and most of the younger scouts remember little of the ceremony other than "there were some Indians" (which, yes, I cringe about and will do my best to get them to listen to the legend of it, but I probably get 1 out 5 to actually be willing to take the time to listen, which is why I feel it needs to be mandatory). Sorry, I realize this is a great deviation away from the topic of this thread, but I feel it is so important that we have discussion on keeping the OA relevant, while also keeping its traditions relevant as well (that is in the obligation, after all)- and if anyone from the Exec Board actually reads these threads, I am happy to be part of whatever group is assembled to engage the Lenape to sit with them and discuss how we can continue to honor them in a way that does not offend (even if that means stopping the OA ceremonies).

These may not be exactly what you were using, but you perhaps could modify them to your needs: http://trax.boy-scouts.net/scoutttrax.htm

Good assessments. How many times have we seen scouts (or even adults for that matter) wearing a sash at a non-OA event, because they think that the sash is the penultimate of what the OA is? There is, and should be, so much more to the OA than just the workday aspect. Convincing youth of that is a hard thing- and, if the other aspects such as fellowship weekends are not full of fun, or even fun-based learning events, then there is the challenge of getting the youth to chose to go to that over a troop event (let alone anything non-scouting related they could do). Our lodge, IMO, suffering a lot from the "we can have the OA run a trading post" at X council activity. Conclave has traditionally been a pretty fun event in our section- I would say my son was not entirely engaged to the OA until he got to experience Conclave. The expense of it can be prohibitive though. Our council charges above the per attendee fees set by the Section, which drives me crazy. Personally, I think that our council wants the OA doing all this work, but also wants the operation of the lodge to be budget neutral, so we soak the members for every event. Hardly makes anyone feel like they are part of any special group. Paying $30 to go and do a weekend full of work, not sure many would see that as a good experience or value. I am curious to how members from other lodges view the relationship of their councils in relation to the OA and costs. Does your council supplement the OA from a budget perspective?

Use his words against him as part of your "have a nice day" dismissal: Mr. Jones, we understand you have concerns and that you feel strongly about those concerns. While we do absolutely take safety seriously, the very intent of the scouting program is to empower scouts to run THEIR program, not ours. If you believe that we are not the right fit for your child, we can respect that and feel it is best that we part amicably, and sincerely hope that you are able to find another unit that aligns to your vision of what is "the right troop".

Unfortunately, this post above all else is the issue for me. We cannot preach it is OK to only follow 7 points, 8 points, or 11 points of the Scout Law. It is all. Do we give an automatic boot? I would say no, but that does not mean advancement to the highest levels are possible for that youth. From Life, requirement #2: As a Star Scout, demonstrate Scout spirit by living the Scout Oath and Scout Law. Tell how you have done your duty to God and how you have lived the Scout Oath and Scout Law in your everyday life.

Option B, but don’t wait, do it now. Offer them that the troop will transfer 100% of their fees to a new troop now so they can fully charter for 2019.

You folks all hit some good marks, and my observations from the past 5 years being back in Scouting with my son generally fall in line with your perceptions. I also began to really talk to “older scouts” (as well those who were 18+ that still came around the Lodge events. Personally, yes National got very skittish on “the secret society” concerns, and the directive today on Ordeal is basically if the candidate shows up, and stays through the induction ceremony, that is all that is required. You can’t make them do the challenges, and anyone who wants to know all what goes on during the weekend (parent), you can’t ignore their request. The cub ceremonies are a loss, but in my own view, they were not doing much to actually motivate youth getting guns ho on being outdoorsman in recent years. Arguably, the new scripts are an attempt by National to get scouts interested in high adventure, though in a very cornball way that I don’t see will be impactful. Overall, I just see less and less interest by scouts to do high adventure. Even just weekend canoe or backcountry backpacking weekends are a struggle to get them interested. Couple with the number of adult leaders that have zero interest, and it is not a good recipe. My honest suggestion to our Lodge/Section youth leaders has been to rethink their model. Having a “fellowship weekend” once or twice a year, where board games, Magic card games, movies and and flashlight tag at the council camp is a huge opportunity wasted. You aren’t going to get the 14+ year old Paul Bunyan type Scouts to waste their time (or money) on it. Plan a weekend that involves going out and doing something that requires using scoutcraft skills might just get the scout who is bored with his troops’ car camping, adult planned weekends to come and be with other scouts from other units that are in the same boat. Let OA be an avenue for delivering scouting in a way that many troops are lacking. It may not draw back the scouts or troops that have drawn themselves away from council camporees/Klondike derby, etc. (IMO many of those units withdrew because they didn’t see those events giving their scouts a challenge), but it gives the OA the opportunity to be special to the scouts who want to be involved in something that is more mature, without just harping the $1,000+ high adventure base opportunities or NOAC.

The message in our council was basically identical to Circle 10, so yes, it is a boilerplate.

A photo of the scouts (with holiday season, perhaps you have that opportunity that the pack or troop is gathered and can herd them together for a quick shot) and perhaps a card signed by as many of the youth as you can is a wonderful gift. Most leaders that I have seen step away cherish the memories they made, and probably have more gear than they care to admit they built up in their years in the program

The boat sounds like something that indeed could be decisive, especially if someone is using it for personal use far more than the scouts are using it. Biggest issue here from what you have told us though, is as @SSScout and @scoutldr point out- if the church is defunct, then this former pastor is NOT the COR as there is no Charter Organization here! That means there is not really a troop, and you absolutely have right to question the spending of any money, as all that money is questionable as to who "owns" it. Troops do not actually own $, they can fundraise, but those funds all technically belong to CO of their troop. Now, you could form a group called the Friends of Scouting for XYZ township or something to be the CO, but you really need the DE or your council registrar to advise on how to do that appropriately.

Disrupting the system in place now would obviously be a very difficult challenge, and one that would probably leave many units in a scramble. The reality that a COR really has no training requirements about what the program even is leaves an obvious void on that person taking control over quality and what is actually going on in the unit. Current unit for my son is chartered by American Legion- the "COR" changes every year, as it is the newly elected Post Commander that holds that title. Fortunately, the current Post Commander has served in that role in the past, his son was a Scout (and he served as a troop committee member in those days), so he has understanding of the program and its actual workings. What do you do with the COR who won't even take the very basic My.Scouting.org training module?

You can search open DE job postings on nationals website. You won’t see a massive amount of difference in salary from one rural area to another, or one urban area to another. Whenever I hear a unit leader make a snide remark at how well paid staff is, my stomach churns. It takes a special person to leave a corporate job just to go into being a professional Scouter if they are looking at the financials. Considering our current CSE was in charge of HR for the BSA as his prior job, and there was not drastic change to comp for the DE postition on his promotion, I don’t see it happening now. I personally would love to go back to the earlier days of the BSA, where the notion of the need for paid staff was a result of challenges of too much having to go to National (the first councils were directed by volunteers, not paid SE’s, and being snail mail was the only way to get chartering done or membership applications processed, the idea was councils could do it in shorter time).

Many used to actually enforce a minimal measure of what it meant to "serve actively in your troop" in terms of leadership PORs, which by general rule of thumb from my time as a youth was 75% of all troop activities, and campouts were part of that. I see ever increasing numbers of units that have no minimum criteria, and not so coincidentally have issues of getting older scouts to actually go on campouts.

I'm sure right now National Supply has a boatload of debt with all the skorts they've ordered readying for the cub launch and all the new Scouts BSA branded merch they ordered for 2019.

Local camps are council property, and many of them are actually private or public trusts, and not actually owned by BSA or councils. Both Philmont and Summit are held in trusts as well, so not like BSA could sell that (expenses of operating thee, whole different story). I have no idea about Seabase or Northern Tier, but assume those are held in trusts or at least there are restrictions that they can't be sold. The optics of the whole thing are more the damaging part. A couple other articles: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/boy-scouts-weighs-bankruptcy https://www.scsun-news.com/story/news/local/new-mexico/2018/12/12/lawsuit-accuses-boy-scouts-negligence-new-mexico-abuse-case/2289026002/

@qwazse beat me to it- a great number of the Eagle scouts I have come to know from recent years had completed Camping/Cooking MB requirements by the time they were Star.

The lack of actual requirement for anything related to outdoors beyond First Class as well. Youth of today are growing up in such a different environment, on many levels, and the numbers who are into outdoor activities like hiking, camping, biking, even fishing are smaller in many parts of the US. Speaking here in MA, the Boy Scout membership numbers are so horribly decreased even in the last 15 years, that council mergers were a necessity to decrease expenses. And we are not done, there will be even more consolidation to come. The safety bubble has also contributed to a lack of actual integrity to programs. I have posted on the forums a bit about this- my son changed troops because the program he was in was not at all focused on anything "high adventure" related. Even small things, like the 5 mile hike requirement for Tenderfoot was ignored- "oh, the kids did 3 miles, that is close enough". My son became an Eagle, and he did absolutely none of the Camping MB requirement #9 activities in that troop- he did the needed requirements tagging along with his Scouting friends and their units. That's really not something that made him proud, and even less so considering that he saw like 10 other kids become Eagle in his time there that also had never done any of those activities. That troop is not at all alone, I could say that about 1 out of 4 troops I encounter in this area are on the same path. The leaders will say "kids in my troop aren't into doing those things", and really, that is perfectly fine. But, then why are you ignoring they aren't doing them and signing off on rank advancement and MBs? I am absolutely certain that there are still many, many folks out there delivering Scouting as it was intended- even in the GSUSA. But I absolutely fear the things that we discuss here about the GSUSA are already infecting a great deal of our own membership. And the biggest challenge for the BSA is how do we stop it?

I don't believe that "dumbing down" is at all going to be resulting because girls are being admitted- from all that I experience in my area, I feel the dumbing down has already been happening. I am in agreement to @Eagledad's sentiments that what this organization was perceived at before has changed. If "it isn't all about the Eagle', BSA would not keep making the point in all this Scouts BSA marketing, it would just be understood and implied by saying that girls are going to have the same opportunities as boys.

Sentiment I heard from about 8 staff members this summer that are Life scouts- "i want to get my Eagle done before the change". Here's the thing about all of this for me: it isn't about bashing girls, it isn't about just the past traditions, it isn't about what I or any adult desires- the youth of this organization should be the ones deciding the membership policies, and the name of their organization should they so chose to change it.

Yours sound better run that what I have experienced. Ours often have the vibe similar to what others commented - it is expected that every scout will participate in every activity, which just makes it no fun. if its an activity that some of the kids want to do , they get a lesser experience having to concern themselves with the kids who don't want to do it, etc. Then again, I think the same people planning these events today are the same ones who were around planning them when I was a kid, which is a problem in and of itself I get lots of "invitations" at RT that they "need help". Attended a few meetings for a few events, the same 3 people talked over everyone and did what they wanted anyway, so let it go.

Even as a youth, and even more now as an adult, I disliked Camporee's being so themed and scheduled that the weekend felt like a day of school. Go here for 50 minutes, then walk over her for 50 minutes, etc. I also disliked that adults did all the planning. Get scouts from around the district/council to come together and plan it. That might be difficult to do twice a year, so just have one. And build in plenty of time for the units to be able to "free-form". Even on a troop campout, you'll have some scouts more jazzed about doing pioneering projects than others, or another group may want to go fishing and others not. To me, the ideal behind a Camporee is for scouts to mingle with other scouts, make new friends, and see that they are part of a larger body, not be simply moving in a herd with their own unit members. Similar philosophy on a smaller scale than summer camp really.