Jameson76

2 hours ago, Gwaihir said:

I remember hearing something at membership meeting this year, about how national crunched the numbers and in their decision to reach changing demographics and single-mother house holds, they threw this factoid in there, that they can always count on former boy scouts and eagle scouts to be members.  It feels like these decisions were all made under the assumption that Boy scout and eagle scout alum would sign their families up regardless of what they did to change the program.  Now, I have no more to go on except that little blurb, but it certainly seems to me that the dropping of all traditions and history in lieu of a completely new scouting would seem to mesh with this theory. 

Revamping and assuming all the current folks / participants would stay worked really well for ISP the "Improved Scouting Program" in 1973

8 hours ago, cgail said:

WB doesn't teach basic Scout craft.  The 21st century course is all about management and communication.  

That was a problem for several members of my course who were brand new Cub leaders.  They hadn't even had a chance to take BALOO yet, much less IOLS.

I wish it would teach more basic woodcraft - much like I've heard the "old" course described as.

  And the challenge is that sooo many Scouters take WB and assume they are now the end all be all when what needs to be conveyed is likely how to actually run a program, make sure they have a fun program, and know how to run a unit

6 minutes ago, Chris1 said:

Wood badge is now about leadership management team development whether you like it or not. I think it is a good course so long as you're not expecting the Scout craft course. Most of the Scout crafts has been moved to introduction to outdoor leadership skills. Is there enough time in that course to cover everything? No. Should BSA introduce a intense scoutcraft course for adults? Maybe. Will enough adults take it? I have my doubts considering we can't get them i o l s for 24 hours when it is basic training.

For more Scouts skill courses I would suggest requesting them at your local University of scouting. Most councils have that once a year, a day-long training for adults.

 

While leadership and management team development is important, not sure it is what the focus of the "premiere" BSA training course should be.  Really needs to be focused on what the heck to do outdoors, how to have a successful unit program, how to implement Boy Led units.

When you find an award and give the award, make darn sure you announce the right name for the award

1 hour ago, NJCubScouter said:

he is an atheist and is not interested in having his daughter in an organization that would not have him as a member.  

Had a conversation with a parent one time, said he was an atheist, was concerned about our "influencing" his son in Christian beliefs. 

First point I made was that we were in fact sponsored by a UMC, met at the UMC, held COH and other events in the sanctuary of the UMC, so by default there was going to be a slight Christian influence.  Not in your face and lake baptisms, but we did do a prayer as we left on outings, Sunday Scout's own ecumenical (very short) service, and a closing prayer before we departed an outing.   Usually just mention God and a request / thank you for safe travels and a safe weekend.  We tend to pledge allegiance to the flag also.

Then as we talked while he said he was atheist, as I peeled that onion back it wasn't that he was an so much an atheist, he just didn't like or believe in organized religion.  He did sort of feel that there was likely a higher power of some sort that he could not fully define.  I explained that was probably within the broad definition of religious principle

Nothing more and nothing less

We use the Boy Scout Handbook.  Pretty much has all the requirements list in a handy chart in the back.  Once they are all signed off, SM conference and BOR

The troop does recommend using the MB workbooks as that helps the Boy Scouts keep organized

On 5/21/2018 at 7:03 AM, Eagle94-A1 said:

Still in there.  Page 92 has this

Note: Pioneering projects, such as monkey bridges, have a maximum height of 6 feet. Close supervision should be followed when Scouts are building or using pioneering projects.

Sad part is the whole thing is like 105 pages....not so much a Guide as a Tome 

1 hour ago, carebear3895 said:

Believe it or not, we all want the same thing; to provide a quality program to youth. 

Possibly, but not really.  I was a DE for a while.  Key thing was membership numbers and money.  Quality program never enters the conversation

1 minute 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. 

My joke with many of the Wood badgers (cult of the pink hankie) is "hey, this is a Boy Scout (only works if one the youth is around), have you dealt with any of them recently???

1 minute ago, FireStone said:

This was the same guy who asked me what my goals were for my own scouting career. . 

Goals for my scouting "career" (career seriously??)?  Have fun, help the Boy Scouts in the unit have fun, and not get killed in fiery backpacking stove explosion.  Other than that, do not plan to give it much thought

Breaking point for most will be when substantial change that you are not in favor of or cannot support comes to roost in whatever part of Scouting where you personally find satisfaction and reward.

For me that satisfaction and reward is working with the troop at the unit level.  Changes in membership requirements a few years back, really did not effect the unit.  Adding girls, we do not do any district or council camporees and also plan to be single gender (no linked either) so again does not really effect the unit.  Name changes ( to loosely quote Starship -  Someone always playing corporation games; Who cares they're always changing corporation names) really does not effect the unit.  Summer camp may be a different thing in 2019, will have to see and we will adjust plans as needed. 

Are there things that would effect the unit?  Absolutely.  Requirements could change, less outdoor focus (we really need more), maybe Coed is not optional, substantial membership fee increases, and other myriad items.  Then that could be a breaking point

Real challenge is that with these changes how does this effect potential families and boys perception of the BSA?  Obviously depends on what you are looking for in a group.  Not sure if a 10 year old boy who maybe is one the fence will now rush to join since girls can join.

6 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I'd be interested to get Mike's opinion on what a troop should do.  Much of what I see in his comments a unit could do today.

Increase the adventure in your troop program.  Make your troop program less coddling. Etc.  I grant that National has restricted too many things in the name of safety.  But I bet there is lot troops could do now to start the process.

We played British Bulldogs the other day, it was glorious and the Boys Scouts thought it was geat

You definitely have to drive the adventure and fun, but you (WE) as leaders have got to set the direction and make the adventure happen.  These are some of the things we have done last 12 months

• We do a Lock-in, which is basically 14 hours total, and in that is 3 to 4 hours of dodgeball and 2 hours of Nerf wars.  Yeah yeah, no scouts as targets, we may have missed that paragraph in G2SS
• We do a Capture the Flag, where you tear a ribbon off the opposing players arm to capture them, during this we are literally one boulder crushing away from Lord of the Flies
• We do an aquatics outing where we rent canoes and they canoe to an island during the day, only rule is you gotta have on the life jacket, if you are not canoeing we are hauling you around on a tube behind a boat
• We go to a rail to trail bike path and they do 25 to 60 miles in the weekend
• Our winter trip is 3 day backpacking, or canoeing in the swamp
• One weekend outing we went down into a gorge (permit only) and I was pretty sure I was gonna die
• One weekend we go to a ropes course and camp in the park, they spent 3 hours up in trees
• At one summer camp we take the troop swimming at a water fall in a nearby state park, the locals hanging out there are always entertaining
• Also every year we go to either Seabase of Philmont

The troop does 13 outdoor / events each year (not including HA and HA training stuff).  If you went to all of them it would be 27 nights of camping and 39 days involved in scouts NOT inclusive of meeting, service projects, etc.

Point is adventure is made, it takes work.  But damn if it isn't worth it.

45 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I believe the BSA membership would have been better off if National hadn't done anything the last 10 years

Absolutely agree.  There were (and are) things in place to handle most if not all of the various membership issues as the local CO has the say as to who can and cannot be a member.  National BSA sort of muddied the waters, kind of like they are doing now.  With the addition of girls, and there will not be enough units or units will go COED or something in the middle.   BSA National hopes to be all things to all people but also falls back when convenient on "local unit control".

I have never seen a company, organization, or group that spends as much time and energy hoping to placate and appease those that are not even members, would likely not be members, and have no idea what the organization does.  While at the same time discounting and kind of ignoring those that are in fact members and participating.

1 hour ago, Tampa Turtle said:

See..that's not accurate because if it was really the Methodists they would not actually have voted.  The skorts issue would have been discussed, then talked about, then discussed again, then a sub-committee of Bishops would have looked at it, then it would have been brought up at the next annual conference, then there would have been a motion to table and vote at the next General Conference if so warranted by the sub committee

6 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

Gee maybe then National is right...

Now you're just being silly

Depends - Do the leaders stay in the background and let the Boy Scouts do their scout stuff unencumbered (except of health and safety concerns)?  If they are helicopter parents who hover, then 1 leader can be too many.  If they understand what their role is at camp and on outings, then it's relative.  If they just try to be timekeepers, help the scouts stay on track, then the actual count does not matter. (though a 1 to 1 would be a pain)

We take 50 and typically have equivalent of maybe 7 - 8 leaders in camp.  Honestly as long as the boys are out of the campsite at activities, we are happy.  If a Boy Scout asks for assistance with MB work, the leaders will gladly aide.  We are not monitoring their progress or work accomplished.  Also the condition of the inside of the tent is their personal choice.

Usually one is the main leader, the go to leader in camp.  1 typically makes sure the recently crossed over scouts stay on track.  We try to have one leader at the campsite in the afternoons to be visible around the area.  There is mail to pickup, staff to harass, the wandering of the program areas, maybe SM conferences, boards of review, naps etc

Also we encourage troop activities at the campsite; corn hole games, slack line, etc.  Poker night is fun but you have to engage them early in the week or they have spent all their cash at the trading post.

53 minutes ago, FaithfulScouter said:

Our Troop Committee recently learned that one of our Scouts lied to the Committee while presenting an update on his Eagle Scout project.  The Scout was asked if a specific person had reviewed the proposal and photos and the Scout said he had, and that he had discussed other aspects of the project with him too.  Upon later review, structural and safety issues were revealed. The project has now been suspended and the Scout will have to start over with another one.  Time is not a concern because he is a young teenager.  District Advancement and Council has been involved, although it would seem not to the CC or AC's satisfaction.  Further complicating the issue is that one of the Scout's parents has escalated the issue with near physical confrontations with the SM and members of the Committee.

As a Troop Committee, how should we move forward?

 

Just curious (in general terms) what the project was and what the issue was.  Not discounting anyone's input, but we had a Scout building a bridge, had the plans, then a structural engineer (also volunteer) at the beneficiary wanted to be involved and it went sideways from there.  He basically wanted a footbridge that could hold a car, while it was in fact a short footbridge on a trail.  It needed to be built to "his" standards.  Point is there are typically minimum structural standards and then you may have someone who has their standard because, well they know best and we must acknowledge their knowledge

Now if the Eagle candidate was supposed to meet this specific person, maybe tried to meet, and they were not available, not cooperative, wanted to have the scout do it "their" way and the Boy Scout after some interaction just said heck I'm trying to get this done and plunged ahead, then it is a life lesson.  Hopefully he comes away with an understanding of how to call on people to assist, how to involve the Eagle coach, his SM, and get a meeting of the minds to move something forward.

If he just never even contacted, reached out, or never tried to engage this person but said he had because he just did not want to, that is another issue

32 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

To what end? Even giving up all the salary would have little effect on the problem.

I believe if voice is to have impact, one has to be careful that their rhetoric doesn't give the appearance of class envy. I heard (don't know how true) that the concern is more about funding retirements long term.

Barry

Part of the challenge is salaries

It is basically these 5 items

1. Financial drain for the Summit - the losses there are staggering
2. BSA National overhead costs not adjusted in relation to membership - seriously doubt the overhead has been reduced 10% in last 4 years
3. Many years of underfunded pension payments 
4. Exploded liability insurance premiums - thus the 38% membership increase
5. Reduced membership and thus less revenue - This has accounted for close to $30MM less income in the last 4 yearts

13 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

But most of the reason the BSA kept on the strait and narrow path of building character through a boy run theme was the huge support of it's alumni. Alumni support based on their experience, so they don't like change. No other youth program has (had?) near the financial support from alumni as the BSA. I'm not sure when that support started to fall, but I'm sure the cultural pressure on traditional scouting had a great influence. Ironically that National is admitting girls to increase membership is likely to be a last straw for many alumni. 

For a long time (waaay back in the day) you would age out of Boy Scouts, maybe go to college, get a trade, have a family, then move back to an active role with the Boy Scouts as you son grew up.  You had familiarity with the program as it had not changed, same outdoor and leadership.  A good bit of that changes in the 70's with the big new scouting program.  Imagine if you aged out of youth in 1970 and came back as a leader with a kid in 1980, you would not have recognized the program.  Same will be for those that aged out 2010 and when they look at what BSA is in 2022 it will be vastly different.

To your point on alumni, many of us active with the Scouts are sadly watching it change.  Less outdoor, more STEM items that are likely done better by other groups.   Look as these 17 merit badges introduced since 2010 -  Geocaching, Inventing, Scouting Heritage, Chess, Robotics, Kayaking, Search and Rescue, Welding, Game Design, Moviemaking, Programming, Sustainability, Digital Technology, Mining in Society, Animation, Signs, Signals, and Codes, Exploration.  While good subjects many are not overly outdoor or leadership oriented and tend to be able to be done without a good bit of outdoor work

The BSA is making the big play to bring in the new numbers by changing the equation and not really worrying about their core group.  Rather than serious benchmarking and review of why some troops and areas maintain and grow and others struggle, the decision is wholesale change.  In the interview in October the CSE basically said they were out of ideas and this was it (girls)

To your point it has been an onward march to change.  Let's bring on families, let's add the Disneyworld of High Adventure, let's not worry about who is active and participating and meeting their needs and grow from that, we will chart a new path with who knows.

28 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

Do not confuse YPT and Two Deep leadership

YPT designates (in this instance) no one on one contact.  In the case of an injured, but let us assume ambulatory Scout; one leader, the injured youth, and a buddy can return to the trailhead.  The other leader and the rest of the youth can continue.

But the other leader and the rest of the den no longer has 2-deep leadership. Also, what does the leader and the buddy do when the other youth is evacuated? (assume parent arrives to take them to a medical facility) You are now again in a situation where the buddy and the leader may find themselves in 1 on 1 contact.  

Two deep designates / means - At least two adults are required on every BSA outing.  There is no geographical encumbrance on that point.  Take the injury portion away, on an outing of 12 Scouts and 2 leaders, 6 want to go hike to the fire tower and 6 want to hike over to the lake and go fishing.  That is fine.  All are on the outing and there are two leaders

On the evacuated scout you can easily take injured and two Scouts so you have no one on one contact when you rejoin the main group.  

Now yes, then you may ask what happens if with the group coming back there is another injury what do you do, and who knows.  That is "what if" to the extreme and honestly if one wants to try and plan all through the multiple derivations and decision trees, may as well never leave the house

6 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

How do you handle YPT requirements when they conflict with emergency situations?

You are 1.5 miles out on a 5 mile hike with your den and a scout is injured. There are just two leaders on the hike. What do you do?

If there are three leaders, what do you do?

Do not confuse YPT and Two Deep leadership

YPT designates (in this instance) no one on one contact.  In the case of an injured, but let us assume ambulatory Scout; one leader, the injured youth, and a buddy can return to the trailhead.  The other leader and the rest of the youth can continue.  

At least two adults are required on every BSA outing. During that outing, there should be no one-on-one contact between an adult and a youth. Parents and youth are advised to follow this and other Youth Protection policies for the overall safety of all involved.

But there might be moments when just one leader is present with two or more Scouts. (as noted in the first aid issue) That’s fine, as long as the situation doesn’t involve one adult and one youth.

55 minutes ago, desertrat77 said:

I think the Cookie Syndicate funds their PR function pretty well.

Could be worse....

1 minute ago, gblotter said:

Love it. I show off my Nixon signature with a grin. The early 70s were such a weird period of history (including Scouting history).

Urban Scouting...the great revamp of the 1970's, Boypower and Manpower and whatnot

If you get lost on a hike, ask a cop

The wonderful world of Skill Awards, Camping and Cooking MB were not required.  You could easily earn Eagle Scout and never camp, never start a fire, never leave your neighborhood.  In fact you could not even go outside