HashTagScouts

7 minutes ago, blw2 said:

yes, I knew all of that about Bear Gryls.

Yes, a person like that may not know how to run a board room meeting....but in my opinion they'd still make a good functional head in that they could steer things in a good direction for the youth.... keep things grounded so to speak.  they can always have accountant types or whatever supporting and advising them....

And call him a fake adventurer if you want... the guy was British special forces till he broke his back (that was my understanding anyway)...and he's on camera on his show all the time rappelling, climbing, scrambling, jumping off cliffs into lakes, paragliding, demonstrating scout-skills, and all sorts of stuff.  Often with a little scout pin on his lapel....  sure he has a support crew, and it's all staged.  So what?

I don't think kids would much care about the possibility it is all staged.  What they more care about is if the person is 'cool'.  I've met some Scouters with what I consider really awesome pedigrees (several trips to Philmont, Northern Tier, several 50 milers, go on shorter treks each year, really get the patrol method, etc.), but then see them around youth and they are awkward as heck and the youth don't really connect with them.  

1 hour ago, Peter1919 said:

Ok interesting where you guys have taken the discussion. So in the UK we don't just have Bear Grylls as Chief Scout we also have some more minor celebs as Scouting Ambassadors. Sometimes they do events by themselves other times the accompany Bear to things. What they all do is help get publicity for Scouting, we have been fairly succesful in the last 12 years or so on getting fairly regular national news coverage of Scouting, most usually on breakfast news programmes where they like a good news story, Part of the key to this success has been having a celebrity to hook the news item on and then pivoting that so that the youth members do the talking.

So you take a celebrity, get them to visit a large Scouting event such as a jamboree. This becomes a news item even if only on the local news. They then interview the celeb and some youth members as to what Scouting is about and in recent years this message has been about how we need more adult volunteers as we have more kids wanting to join Scouting than we have spaces for. This drip feed has helped to start to turn the public perception of what Scouting is when they see kids having fun at amazing Scout events.

Classic example of news coverage of a Scouting event visited by Bear http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/update/2017-07-30/thousands-in-kent-for-scout-jamboree/ NB the video at the bottom is what was broadcast on TV.

Oh and the exisitng members seem to love having Bear visit and this is the kids of stuff he can get up to when visiting an event (Steve Backshall is one of the Scouting Ambassadors I mentioned, he is a kids TV naturalist and adventurer)

 

 

To me, this is the type of advertising that is needed and been desperately needed here in the USA for some time.  I recall as a youth in Scouts, there were some national ads. I vaguely recall sporadic TV commercials on Saturday mornings, but also radio ads.  This particular video was from the 70's, but the quality from the 80's ads weren't much better (and used that same jingle).

8 minutes ago, WonderBoy said:

Correct me if I'm wrong (which is an assurance in an online forum 🤣), but if your jacshirt is "vintage" then you're free to put what you what on it...

Although personally, once you get past the pocket Scout emblem, some award patch on the other pocket, a large center back patch, a felt Philmont bull and maybe one or two others somewhere, the jacshirt starts to look a little crowded & "busy". 

1 minute ago, scotteg83 said:

Growing up, I always thought the jacshirt was the adult version of a cub scout brag vest

Mine has many patches- one for each SR I have been to, as well as my 50 miler and my OA emblem.  If we are talking about the field uniform (class A)- yes, that is a uniform and thus should truly be uniform across all members.  My feeling on the jacshirt is it is entirely optional, and is about the wearer.  If the BSA wanted to buy me one, or are going to make it a required part of the uniform, they could get more dictatorial about what I put on there.  

35 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

*cough* Wrong Avenger *cough*

Try Star Lord 😎

My bad- you are correct! Star Lord came with Chris evans and they did the Boston celebrity hospital circuit

55 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

That's my reaction when I see some of the more obscure names.  No offense, but I've never heard of Paul Sereno, Cliff Jacobson, and the others.  My thinking is that for an ambassador, you need someone who will have enough name recognition to change the dynamics of averages person's impression of Scouting.  

I think it makes sense for it to be more than one person.  Recruiting 10--20 different people and having a group sounds like a good idea.  I like Chris Pratt.  In fact, I think it would be cool for the BSA to line up as many Avengers as possible.

Ultimately, what I think the BSA needs to do is get kids excited about Scouting.  My sense is that you do that by tying into kids hopes & dreams for the future.  Great people were Scouts, I want to be great, I should be a Scout.

 

I think would need to be someone that is "relatable" to Scouts. I do think you are on the right track there.

1 hour ago, Hawkwin said:

Who? Seriously. I had to google him.

Other than being a field paleontologist, I don't see how his profession would be a strong advocate for Scouts. Does he sleep in a tent? Does he build fires without matches?

 

There is a long list of Eagle celebrities. One of them might be a better fit:

https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2018/02/08/bsa-turning-108-heres-list-108-famous-former-scouts/

I see quite a few on that list that would bring a lot of media attention as well as new applicants. Chris Pratt would be at or near the top of that list.

Chris Pratt would be relatable to the current generation.  He's actually a pretty decent guy- he's come back to Boston and visited with kids in the hospital and such, and lent his celebrity to some fundraising causes here over the years since he hit fame as Captain America.  I don't think I have read him attribute much to his time in Scouting, so not sure his viewpoint on the organization.

My bias of being a New Englander- Shane Victorino would also be an excellent choice.  World Series champ, Eagle Scout in a decade that the kids of today can at least somewhat relate to as their parents generation.  

Much of what goes into the shows that Bear Grylls is a part of a re staged, but, c'mon, I think 12 year olds can figure that out.  Taking a celebrity out and they state "I've never really spent time in the outdoors", and thinking they are going to eat nothing but grubs and drink filthy water for a 3 day trek is just fantasy.  Not knocking Bear, it's all just entertainment, not actual survival.

59 minutes ago, The Latin Scot said:

On the contrary, I can understand @Chris1's concerns in light of my previous remark; I am happy to address it. 

I went through my Ordeal 21 years ago when I was 14. I didn't understand what I was getting into, I didn't understand the OA, and I didn't care much for it when I finished my youth Scouting career not much later. I knew it was a good organization that taught good things, but nobody ever taught me what the greater significance was, and I was never once afterwards invited to an OA event, told about an OA activity, nor informed about OA service projects. For all I knew, the Ordeal was the entirety of the Order.

Two years ago I was thrown back into the world of Scouting when I was called on to serve as a Webelos Den Leader. I jumped in full throttle, and made it my mission to learn everything there was to know about the BSA and Scouting in general. This led me to rediscover the OA, and in my research, to realize what a large, important, and life-changing organization it could be in the lives of the boys under my care. I wanted the boys in my Pack to strive to live the ideals the OA espouses. I wanted the boys in our Troop to honor the OA and participate in its programs. And I wanted to advance my role by receiving my Brotherhood honor. 

Naturally, I knew I needed to earn it. I renewed my dues, became active in my local chapter, and started promoting the OA in our Troop. We hadn't had an election in over a decade. So it took a lot of work, a lot of influencing, and a lot of effort, but we have finally started having elections, our boys are starting to take an active role in our chapter, and this weekend, 20 years overdue, I am finally receiving my Brotherhood honor, and I will be proud to contribute all of my talents and energies to the Order for the next 18 months, before my Church moves on to a new program that will require me to shift my focus and energies.

But I have given this years of thought, and I think it would be a profound personal loss if I didn't complete this part of my OA path by receiving my Brotherhood honor and ensuring that my boys devote 18 months of the finest service possible while we are still a part of this fine organization. I intend to "go out with a bang, not with a whimper," as the vogue LDS mantra seems to be lately. So upon deep and long reflection, I am deeply grateful that I will be able to achieve my Brotherhood honor and still have time to make a meaningful contribution before we move on to other things. I am sorry if my earlier post trivialized my perspective; I hope this helps clarify my point of view.

18 months of devoted service is probably more than we get from 75% who go through Ordeal nationally, so I say kudos to you and enjoy the moment! WWW

11 hours ago, NJCubScouter said:

I’ll bet you a dollar he never said “the BSA” is not going coed.  The BSA has been coed for 45 years.  In this time where program names are being changed, it’s especially important to get our terminology straight.

Unfortunately, the terminology not being straight is a direct reflection that National hasn't had their terminology straight from the get go.  Remember, it was going to be a "separate program" for girls.  Do I believe that what they were referring to was simply "separate troops"? Yes, in hindsight, fully I do believe that was their intent.  Did everyone read it that way? No, I feel the posting on these forums reflect that. 

8 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

The video on the front page of the Family Scouting website, about the 8:15 mark, "We're not mandating that scouting becomes co-ed."

Again, knowing more now and looking back at these comments from the CSE, I'm finding myself looking to read between the lines.  "We're not mandating" now feels to me more like "we are not telling you you must, but we are not going to get in the way of".

11 minutes ago, NealOnWheels said:

 

From the latest Guide To Safe Scouting...

Scouts First Helpline

As part of its “Scouts First” approach to the protection and safety of youth, the BSA has established a dedicated 24-hour helpline to receive reports of known or suspected abuse or behavior that might put a youth at risk. 1-844-SCOUTS1 (1-844-726-8871) When to use it: • Anytime you believe a youth has been harmed or their safety and wellbeing is at risk, and you cannot immediately reach your Scout executive or local council. • If a Scout is bullied because of race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability, and local help is unable to resolve the problem. If someone is at immediate risk of harm, always call 911.

Yup, and we were told to feel free to use it as mandatory reporters.

For anyone that has gone through the new YPT (I went through a  live version, using the new National training syllabus) there is the new hotline, which bypasses Council entirely and is investigated by a firm that National has contracted with.  I'm wondering if that is what has transpired here.

8 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

Did you actually receive the letter?  Who was it from?  (Sorry, when you post on a forum you never know when another member might be a lawyer and start cross-examining you.    )

I would find it strange if a Chartered Org sent a letter such as that, and it was not they who contacted you.  I would wait to see the actual letter and what it may/may not outline as far contact information or any next steps it outlines.   To ban from all BSA activities would seem to indicate to me that it is coming from Council (with National's knowledge)- a troop/CO itself cannot ban from all BSA activities, only those they coordinate (troop meetings, troop campouts, etc.).  They can't ban a registered scout from say council merit badge college or order of the Arrow weekends, for example.     

For those who have been around for a while, I wonder if this is the new protocol as part of the new YPT reporting/investigation process?

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

So I come from the thread on how professionals are no good to the thread about how Scouters who take Wood Badge are no good.

 

I am not saying Wood Badge is not good- I am saying that it is no guarantee that all who go through it become Super Scouters.  I was reacting to @gblotter that folks seem incredulous that anyone who has been in an adult leader position for some time hasn't gone through Wood Badge.  And, to the point from @perdidochas it isn't any guarantee that anyone who goes through it truly know more the those who have not.  

I'll give a pertinent example to my position- I sat through a bead presentation, and the course director read off the list of items from the recipients ticket.  The ticket items seemed fairly basic compared to the tickets I have heard read before.  I made a legitimate inquiry to one of the rose necker folks present on whom actually verifies that the objectives of the ticket were achieved (one of the items in particular was that the person was "going to grow Scouting in their community"- seemed pretty straight forward to me, did the pack or troop in that community see any new membership that could be traced to this person?).  What I got was a "well, you know, we instruct the participant to choose items that are personal and meaningful to them, but to be realistic that the item can be achieved".  Never actually answered my question.  I went to another rose necker, and his comment was that the person I was just speaking to was the participants Troop Guide, and the Troop Guide is who signs off.  So, basically, to me, that meant that effort was all that counted, not completeness or results.  Just seemed to me it was more about getting the participants $$$ rather than ensuring that the program is truly being followed.  That very well may be 100% different elsewhere.

7 minutes ago, perdidochas said:

Because you have interacted with them, and have found the majority of Wood Badge trained people in your Council that you have met to be non-impressive in Scout skills and Spirit.  I've met only a few in our Council that have been through Wood Badge that I have though highly of. 

I have met some very good Scouters who are Wood Badge trained, and many I feel would be just as good had they not gone through that program.  I have also met some people that makes me question what the heck they actually teach, as these folks are about as in-touch with the aims and methods of Scouting as a tree. 

34 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

The insane thing is that IOLS. training in that district teaches that axes are too dangerous for scouts to use.   In fact scouters are discouraged from using then as well.  Sets a bad example for the boys don't you know.  

Uggh. That is just awful. 

10 minutes ago, HashTagScouts said:

We have shooting sports- but only in a controlled sterile range environment. Don't dare point a Nerf gun, or a paintball gun, anywhere in the direction of another scout! And don't talk about using those guns and bows for hunting, no way! Not permit by the GTSS. It wasn't always that way, common sense had a place. Sadly, Mike is correct it is lacking today.

I'll go even further. Yes, hiking can be an,asventure- but that requires getting off the well marked trails of your local/state/national park. And if you go entirely off what the BSA program requires, that is one (1!) 5 mile hike their entire time as a Boy Scout. I am a hiking MB counselor, and I can tell you 90% of the Scouts I talk to about getting out and working on that badge point out they don't have to, they did their 5 mile hike, thank you. Of the other 10%, about 2/3 of them will do a couple of the hikes, but will never complete the badge. 

1 hour ago, FireStone said:

His take on safe spaces is interesting. I'm not so sure that many people would equate Scouting with safe spaces. Quite the opposite. We go on hikes in the woods with wild animals and deadly bugs around. We shoot guns, bow & arrows, and slingshots. We use knives. We make fires. We play rough, yell loudly, get dirty, and promote bravery. We aim to instill confidence, leadership, character, and strength in our scouts. And we reward hard work with awards and ranks that take a long time to earn. 

I love that about us. And I think it positions us in stark contrast to the safe space movement.

But I also don't think we're in a great position to lead the charge against that movement. Maybe this isn't exactly the bravest of positions to take, but I feel like we've stuck our necks out plenty lately. Let's be brave, but not reckless. Give us a few years and maybe we can be that kind of organization that Mike suggests. 

Let's get our own house cleaned up and get this new co-ed thing up and running. Then maybe we can talk about leading that charge, and enjoy the help from our new female members in doing so, as Mike also suggested: 

 

We have shooting sports- but only in a controlled sterile range environment. Don't dare point a Nerf gun, or a paintball gun, anywhere in the direction of another scout! And don't talk about using those guns and bows for hunting, no way! Not permit by the GTSS. It wasn't always that way, common sense had a place. Sadly, Mike is correct it is lacking today.

20 minutes ago, David CO said:

The Catholic Church has an extensive system of laws (Canon Law) and courts (tribunals). Every year, the tribunals hears thousands of cases and appeals. The Church has canon lawyers, who are specially educated and trained to present or defend cases before the tribunals.

At the parish level, many parishes have standing grievance committees. A grievance committee acts much like a small claims court. A grievance committee will hear the complaints that don't rise to the level of a tribunal hearing. Decisions of a grievance committee can be appealed to the tribunals.

At various times, I have been a witness/complainant/defendant before the grievance committees and tribunal hearings. So I can't quite agree that the Catholic Church leaves all judging to God.

 

It matters of dispute, you are correct. I am very familiar with the Cathechism. Francis in no way contradicted the authority he has as primary bishop, he simply saw that mercy and kindness is more to the mission of Christ than hate and scourn. The Catholic church is clear that homosexual acts are not acceptable to God, but then neither is premarital sex, adultery, etc. I know plenty of Christians that have regularly engaged in those acts as well.

7 hours ago, Eagledad said:

I'm curious to learn what the Catholic teaching is on homosexuality?

Barry

In a nutshell= love the sinner, not the sin. We are as God created us- however, that does not mean that someone who is homosexual should act upon their sexual desires. The Church says any sexual activity outside of marriage is a sin, and a marriage is only between a man and a woman.  As Papa Francesco says, "who am I to judge?"... that job belongs to only one, God.

And yes, some Dioceses' pulled support of their parishes being CO'' of BSA units with the change in stance of the BSA toward gay adult leaders, and encouaged their parishes to charter Trail Life instead.  There are now Trail Life Catholic religious award programs, and they are different than those used for the BSA.

First aid campout- send an adult victim into the woods, full on fake blood, "bones" protruding from the leg, scouts need to diagnose and assess. Have some scout victims as well, where they need to transport them out for evac (I cannot tell you how much it angers me when units only teach first aid "from the book" at scout meetings).

We used to do campout that involved kayaking to one of the islands in Boston Harbor, bringing anything we needed had to fit in the kayak with us. 

We need parents to unplug as much as we need the youth to. I have tried for 3 years to get any type of adventure Campout on our calendar (3 day canoe trek, two night backpacking trip, etc.) and I get nothing but pushback from the adults. Kids say they re all for it. For the adults, it is either not their cup of tea (it's so much easier to just sit on your but at a fire, or "big activity" would be to go cast some lines), or they don't want to have to give up their whole weekend (they cannot fathom getting home later than noon on Sunday). So, program devolves to become family oriented. Yes, we'll do a summer trip, where families are invited, and there will be a day of kayaking (flat water, guided, where any 8 year old and his parent can go)- hardly an actual adventure. 

Mike is so right. The wussification is the number one reason more youth are not into Scouting today. As much as the "political" issues bug us adults, the youth generally could care less.

It really does depend on the Scout and how well they absorb/retain info.  I've seen plenty of 13/14 yo that would benefit from it, but I'd hesitate to encourage them to go as they lack the maturity IMO to take the info and hold onto it.   As @Eagle94-A1 and @JoeBob state, what they do with the info/skills gained is going to depend an awful lot on their troop and the adult leadership.  My son chose to attend last year, course was literally just before his 14th birthday.  He came back with ideas, SM basically made him feel that it was "cute" he learned things, but never gave any direction of talk to the PLC and suggest XYZ, etc.   Son didn't get hard feelings about the rejection, felt the skills were ones he would use later in life, could be helpful to suggest to others how to improve their units (mentor), etc.  He went back as staff to this years course, and is going back for next years course as well.   Always important to remind the youth that as much as they are learning things for "the now", it's more important to learn for the future.  I know for most councils attending NYLT is an investment financially, but my advice is to encourage him to go.

23 hours ago, Jameson76 said:

My thought is not so much the discrimination standpoint, as honestly the majority of CO's primary provision of material support is in the way of meeting space, access to the grounds, etc.  Not too many of them (though some do) write a check each year.  If they do that is easily balanced.  Your point on equipment is more easily handled / explained as troops with longer tenure will have more stuff accumulated

The point of contention will likely be (as you note) the opportunity available in Old School Boy Scout troop with it's 13 outings per year, 50 Boy Scouts, institutional knowledge, 30+ year traditions, and actual field knowledge VERSUS the newly formed Girls troop with 6 members and trying to figure out how to organize a trip and more importantly.. (wait for it) how to HAVE FUN on a weekend outing.  The girls will want to join (be enabled that opportunity) but the Boy Scout troop will be able to indicate, not an option.  The girls will then likely file suit against BSA for equal access and National will update and allow a coed option

Challenge and real rub will come when National allows the coed option but it is not mandated.  Girls want to join Old School troop for all the opportunities they offer, but the troop desires to stay single gender.  That will trigger the discrimination claims and then hilarity will ensue and most likely in the not to distant future coed will not be an option but will be part of the program.  Units will have to deal with it, also the families that will come with it.

Right or wrong, love it or hate it, want it or not...in 3 to 5 years the program of the Boy Scouts of America for 11 -17 year old boys formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America will be greatly altered in appearance and operation.  Yes the mission and goals will hopefully remain, but it will have much different vibe.

There will be a survey.....

 

Agreed.  And the unit that stays single gender now (and, as much, the leaders involved that made that decision) will be open to accusations of being discriminatory for "segregation".  It's already the discussion that I have seen in motion- do we want to be known for that? or have the legacy of Troop XX be that they were once part of that?

16 hours ago, T2Eagle said:

Unless I'm reading it incorrectly, the Church doesn't seem to be saying the things you're saying.  The Church's statements appear to be saying that the reason its program needs to change is because a program that is very US specific simply doesn't work for a now much more global Church membership.  Nowhere in any of the statements I have seen has the Church attributed its pulling out of scouting to be the result of the changes within scouting.

I firmly believe that the BSA change regarding girls was not made in a quick decision, and that it has been in the works for some time, probably at least since Stephenson and Surbaugh et al took the reigns.  The LDS would have had that knowledge, and could probably have seen the handwriting on the wall.  The doesn't mean they were not throwing around the idea of a global program, but, then again, isn't Scouting a worldwide program, and isn't Scouting in most other parts of the world fully coed?  Coincidence that they wouldn't be looking to do what they had done here in those areas? I don't think so.

I trust those on this forum from the LDS church on what their position(s) are regarding matters of their faith, as I am not LDS and wouldn't presume to know better than they do.  This is a significant blow, and I personally think you may have a small percent of LDS boys continue on to wrap their Eagle rank, but by 2022 we'll probably be counting LDS youth participation on our fingers and toes.  The differences in program between LDS and non-LDS units wasn't to make the core program intrinsically different, but it was designed to accommodate how their faith integrates into life.  

11 minutes ago, David CO said:

It doesn't sound disingenuous at all. It is no more difficult to plan a camping trip to a privately owned facility than it is to attend a BSA scheduled event. We do it all the time. 

 

From conversations I have had with the directors of two camps, their planning as of now for both is centered on either having to add another week, or making one of the existing weeks "girl troops only".  

Yes, there are Venturers on staff at a great many camps, but it will be interesting what happens when you have a mix of younger males and females together. Two 12 year old males left at the nature cabin alone with a 19 year old female staffer might seem OK, but two 12 year old females left alone with a 20 year old male staffer might raise some eyebrows. Scouts are not under 100% supervision at summer camp, and frankly if I were the YPT police, I'd probably write an awful lot of tickets today on daily basis at summer camp.

Troop has decided that we will not pursue a "linked" girl troop.  If there are girls/adults interested in forming a troop, and the CO will back them, they are welcome to go and form their troop.  If our PLC and their PLC want to do anything cooperative during the year, that is their choice- we will not hinder, nor force it.

Many other units in the area I have found feel similar.  One theme I am hearing often is that troops may provide use of equipment to get them going (provided the troop with the equipment isn't in need of it on the same day/weekend), but just outright giving them access to the same bank account is not what they want to do.  no hard feelings in those opinions, it's just being viewed as any other new troop forming, they need to pave their own way. 

10 minutes ago, qwazse said:

 

This is where many of us take for granted that we've each gravitated toward the CO's who give us the latitude we feel we need to deliver the program we think we must.

As a scout, I was always puzzled why a troop started up on the same side of our very small town as my own troop. Reflecting on it, I've come to realize that my SM, who was more than happy to have some rough guys as ASM (all good as gold, but not necessarily paragons of the church who sponsored us), was not the kind of guy everyone wanted to be scouting with. Although strict regarding manners and generous towards missionaries, he would be nobody's agent of protestant reformation. Same for the committee. Clearly, the church hosting our troop expected them to leave any preaching to the professionals. I'm sure it caused no small amount of discomfort to parishioners that we would sometimes attend scout Sunday and the Catholic church and share activities with the LDS troop.

The Baptist church's troop, I believe, was somewhat different. Camp less. Preach more. Watch which lines you cross.

Needless to say, certain types would work well with one CO, but not the other.

COs do differ in their mission, and how they want their various "ministries" to reflect that mission.  Some COs want exclusive involvement by their scouting programs to the CO, some less are concerned about that.  Some CO's have a heavy hand on the program through their COR, others let the COR run more freely, and some of those CORs delegate more to Committee Chairs and SMs than others. 

You do raise a point @qwaze about the number of units that many here may have experienced in the past.  When there may have been more units available, the COs probably could have more tight control and it may not have been as noticeable, as parents/youth could just go down the street and find another unit.  With the decline in participant numbers, there is also a decline in the number of troops/packs.  The town I grew up in had 3 troops, 3 packs when I started in Scouting.  By the time I became a wolf, it was down to 3/2, then as I became a Webelos it was 2/1.  That was in the early 80's, where I have often seen reference that the early 80's was the "peak" for the size of the program.  If anyone wants some rather bleak #'s to look at on enrollment, I give you this link:

http://www.narragansettbsa.org/document/cachalot-analysis-slides-1012/176699