FireStone

With Scouts BSA officially starting for girls in February, hitting Tenderfoot by summer camp is certainly well within norms in terms of time needed. Scouts who cross over from a Pack to a Troop in March an do it, so certainly if a scout signed up with a Troop in February they'd have plenty of time and (hopefully) opportunity to do so. I wouldn't even call it "ambitious", I think it's a reasonable goal for any scout to be well-prepared for the summer camp experience.

Well now we're just trying to thoroughly confuse each other. 🤣

I'm regularly and consistently baffled by the efforts to which scouters are currently going out of their way to muddy the terminology used to describe scouts today. At a council event recently it seemed like scouters were doing their very best to make it as difficult as possible to talk about scouts, particularly girls at the troop level. I heard seemingly any and every way of awkwardly describing scouts, including "Girl scouts" (followed by "I'm not saying Girl Scouts, I'm saying girl, comma, scouts, so it's ok.") As well as the frequent addressing of scouts as "boys" despite being in a setting in which girls were present. Or the awkward mention of "boys" quickly followed by, "...and girls, girls too." I guess credit is deserved for at least trying to correct it. The worst is the "Scouts BSA Scouts", phrasing. It's not technically wrong, just... why? Why are we making this harder than it needs to be? I just don't get the issue. Maybe some scouters are in the habit of saying "boys" but it's just not what I've ever seen or done, even in my own unit or council, and yet now it has somehow become a stumbling block for scouters talking about scouts. I've always just called scouts "Scouts", and that's all I have ever seen and heard from within my unit and frequently outside of my unit throughout district/council. "Scouts, line up," "Scouts, attention," "Scouts gather 'round," etc. Now for some reason all I hear is "Boys". I hate to say it but in some cases I think it's an act of defiance, and if that is the case, I'm really disappointed in the scouters who are using terminology as a form of protest. For those who are simply struggling with the old habit of saying "boys", and you're in a position where you are often addressing mixed-gender crowds (district/council/national events), please try to just say "Scouts". It's simple, it's probably what most of us are used to already, and it works. We're over-complicating this, at best, or (in hopefully very rare cases) making terminology a form of exclusion or protest, at worst. Either way, we need to do better.

I get the unusual nature of a typical girl troop not having the older scouts to lean on for teaching scout skills. In those situations I would think the adults have to take on more of the responsibility. And in that scenario, I hope adults are getting trained and ready to teach those skills through something like IOLS. I wouldn't worry much about getting it done before summer camp. If it happens, great. If not, summer camp can actually be a great place to work on tenderfoot (and other rank) requirements. Some camps have programs designed specifically to help with this.

It's still very much a political issue, if not for us, for the general public. I was out with some scouts this weekend and a local resident decided to yell over to us, "Put the 'boy' back in Boy Scouts!" As much as it's a done deal (there's no going back no matter how many change.org petitions people start), in the public consciousness it is still very much an issue of discussion of a somewhat political nature. And just because something is done and decided, that doesn't mean that the politics of the issue won't still need to be discussed and sometimes debated. There are political issues in the BSA around boys, and this is the proper forum for some of them. Not everything about boys moves to Open Discussion just because boys are the subject.

This is disgraceful. It's entirely counter to what we (people who advocated for girls in troops/packs) wanted when this whole debate was going on. And it's in direct contrast to what we said on behalf of the BSA, the program won't change for the boys. And yet here we are... And you know how this will play out if you boycott the event next year. "Troop XYZ won't come because girls are here, the can't stand getting beat by girls, etc." I'd protest it. I know that's easy to say in the Internet and less so IRL, but it just seems like this needs to be reined in. Marginalizing boys just to pump up girls for Scouts BSA is wrong. I'm a Cub leader and I try to imagine this stuff at the Pack level. Could there be a Pack that gives a girl the top trophy in the Pinewood Derby even though her car ran slower than boys' cars? Geez, it's hard to believe, but after reading stuff like this about what Troops are doing, it's entirely possible.

Our Pack does that as a dinner option but it often gets mixed reviews. I love it, especially when we do chili in the bags. Hot chili over chips is great. But there are always a few parents (especially newer ones) who won't even try it and think we're barbarians trying to feed their kids dinner out of a Doritos bag. 😅 The funny thing is our Pack does incredible food and the taco bags are just one option. We've done steak, potatoes, dutch oven deserts, all kinds of delicious stuff. The joke is that we often eat better in camp than at home. But somehow the taco bag is what people remember and discuss, as if that's all we feed the kids all weekend. One thing I'll add to the original question here: Cook whatever you want, but if you ant to make it easier on yourself, invest in some good cooking equipment. Our Pack menu hasn't changed much but meal prep got so much easier when we upgraded to some nice Camp Chef stoves. We run 3 of the 2-burner stoves for breakfasts and dinners, cranking out food fast and easy. A good, organized kitchen setup is key. Don't dump all of your utensils and tools into a bin. Get an organized camp kitchen box, good stoves, cutting boards, whatever you need to make prep and KP easy. It's an investment, but it will last for many years if well-maintained, and it will make life a lot easier for everyone, much more so than what specific food items you choose for meals.

Some reasonable expectations on the part of parents and leaders would go a long way in keeping the Lion and Tiger programs from fueling burn-out. I'm pretty sure my Pack is overdoing it with Lions, they meet 3-4 times per month sometimes (1 Pack meeting, 2-3 meetings/activities). Same with Tiger. It's unnecessary and at that age just overkill. When I was a Tiger DL we had 1 Den meeting and 1 Pack meeting per month, and met for outdoor activities maybe 3 times that I can remember. Maybe to some folks that's not enough, but for Tigers, it was plenty, and we still got everything done that is required for Tiger rank. I think just having the Lion and Tiger programs and doing something, anything, is enough. The desire of some Packs (mine included) to maintain some minimum level of "we do X numbers of activities per month" as some sort of bragging right is unnecessary and I'd argue probably harmful to the program at that age and level. I think parents need to be a big part of the discussion, too. We have Lion parents who are actually unhappy with the number of activities the kids do, they think there should be more going on each month. Setting better expectations there, too, would be helpful. Yes, we want your Kindergartener to have fun, every month. But we also want them to get the most out of Scouting that they can, and I believe that the aims and goals of Scouting have a greater long-term impact on scouts the older they get. I'd rather see them take it slow in the beginning and stay excited about Scouting longer, then jam a ton of activities and outings into the K and 1st grade years and see them grow tired of it by 4th grade. Scouting is also very repetitive, especially in Cubs. Tigers, Wolves, Bears, we see a lot of similar adventures and requirements. I had a parent once who was concerned that their son joined as a Wolf and missed the Tiger year. They wanted the scout to go back and work on Tiger stuff and earn that rank (which I explained that they can't). And I explained that they didn't miss anything they won't do again at some point in the Wolf and Bear years. So long-story-short, I'd say we should be trying to emphasize in the Lion and probably Tiger year too that we'll make sure the kids have fun and do lots of fun activities, but the program is progressive and we build up the adventure along the way. There is plenty to get excited about in the Lion and Tiger years, lots of great Pack activities, PWD, etc. Enjoy those activities, get to know the Pack program, and gear up for more adventure in the Wolf and Bear years.

Did he do any multi-night camping as a Cub Scout? I think this is where those cub camp summer sessions can really make a difference, doing 2-3 nights in camp with mom/dad, then maybe 5 nights as Webelos, so that by the time they cross over the idea of a week at summer camp is no big deal. I know it's a little after-the-fact in this case, but just saying for others reading this thread. If you have a scout that might be anxious (as I do as well), I view the summer camp experience as a Cub as being a crucial transitional step into a Troop.

I'm convinced there is a way to maintain that same allure without the NA references. Plenty of groups already do this, although sometimes in ways that are far from scout-friendly (think secret societies). What is often so interesting about these kinds of things isn't their accurate depictions of cultural references. It's the ceremony itself, the unique presentation, the costumes/regalia, etc., which often times are unique to the group itself. Some were derived from rituals and/or regalia of other cultures, but they often bear little resemblance to them anymore after evolving over time. I know it's kind of a weird comparison, but I mention it here if only to suggest that if it has worked elsewhere, it might work here. I'm convinced that the OA could create symbolism, ceremony, and regalia unique to itself. It wouldn't be easy, and it would require some serious creativity on the part of many members to develop materials, but it's possible.

Definitely seems like the beginning of the end for NA ceremonies all around. A phased-out approach.

Throughout this whole thing I've kept thinking there's no reason we should have to drop ceremony from the OA entirely. It just needs to change, and maybe not all that much. To me, the mystique of the ceremonies was always the draw. We leaned heavily on the Native American themes, but you could create that same vibe with other themes. Not every club, organization, "secret society", etc that uses ceremonies uses cultural themes, and they still manage to create a similar vibe as OA without them. I don't know exactly what this would look like, what our new theme could be, but I feel like it's possible to keep the ceremonies and do it in a way that doesn't infringe on any particular culture. Just need to put some thought into it. One thing I hope folks keep in mind is that not everything is "cultural appropriation". I've heard comments about images of arrows and tomahawks being appropriated, but those tools were never exclusively Native American. Other cultures globally used similar tools historically, some probably before Native Americans. I think there are only a few key pieces of NA culture that we need to be respectful of and avoid using, but some of the OA program and symbolism is already well within the bounds of being culturally neutral.

Yes.

I'm not sure what you mean by "leave the kids out of it". Leave them out of the social media aspect of it? Or leave them out of the photo?

Who says that's not what is already happening here? A leader could post a photo with that hashtag and leave the scouts out of the discussion entirely.

Part of our membership numbers struggle is public relations, and making people aware of what scouts do. Like it or not, informing the public about scout activities, accomplishments, and service to the community is important. If someone undertakes a service project entirely for social media posting, obviously that's the wrong motivation. But if it happens that there is an opportunity for some good PR while doing something positive, I see no issue with taking advantage of it. We often invite the press to scouting events, Pinewood Derby, etc. This is just the modern day version of that.

Where does she currently manage things like advancement? Is she the only person with access? Kind of unusual that in a whole troop there would only be one person tracking advancement records in Scoutbook or something like that. If she hypothetically left and handed over nothing, you'd still be ok. It might take some digging but you'd be able to get access to your unit records with Council. Same for anything charter related, rostering, dues payments, etc. Keys can be replaced. This might be a headache in the shirt term but it will be a blessing in disguise long-term. Once you get access to what you need, whether from her or Council, I'm sure you won't make the mistake she did and keep it all in one place. Get a bunch of people signed up on Scoutbook to share the advancement tracking. Get any key logins/access shared among your core leadership to help manage everything. It will be fine.

Thanks for the update. It's not surprising that the background check came back with problems. It was hard to imagine he wasn't avoiding it, with so much time having gone by and it was still not done. Hard to imagine someone isn't trying hard to avoid a background check when they act like that. This still seems like a massive failure at the district and council level to adequately support the Pack in this. You essentially had an unregistered, non-background-checked adult pretending to be a CM. And seemingly refusing to allow a background check. That should have been a huge red flag for everyone, all the way up the chain. And yet it took this long to finally resolve the matter, and only really because of what happened in the guy's personal life. While it is generally true that DEs tend to be slow to action with Pack affairs, preferring to let units and COs resolve these matters, in this case I would think that this would be the kind of thing that just had to be dealt with immediately. That a Pack was operating with a rogue CM, who clearly was causing chaos among the committee and Pack operations, with known past legal issues and refusing to take a background check, how they managed to let it go on this long is baffling. For all of the emphasis we get these days on YPT, that something like this was allowed to go on for so long just defies all logic. I still think someone (probably the DE in question) should be removed from their post for failing to adequately address this and protect the scouts in this Pack.

There's a story that floats around my Pack about a scout from years ago who made it all the way through Arrow of Light without officially registering with the Pack. Not sure how accurate the story is at this point, could be he was registered but didn't pay dues the next year or something. Who knows. The point is, it has become a sort of cautionary tale for leaders. Make sure your scouts are properly registered, everyone is up to date, rostered in Scoutbook, etc. As for the scout in question here, I would use the dangling carrot of advancement. We do all advancement tracking in my Pack through Scoutbook now, including reports for purchasing awards/badges/pins. If a scout isn't registered, they don't have a number and aren't fully entered into Scoutbook, nor can we generate the report needed to buy advancement awards at the Scout Shop. I would leverage that to persuade the parents to officially sign the kid up. Just say, "We'll be handing out awards/badges/belt loops/whatever next week and your son/daughter has been participating but can't receive their award because they're not in the system yet. Let's fix that."

My daughter is 4, going on 5 this year, and she's skipping the Lion year. I don't see the point of it, and it will only contribute to burnout, possibly hers, more likely mine. Maybe this is a little selfish, but I don't want to learn the Lion program and end up running it, which I will since I'm already a DL and I'm sure I'll get pulled into that role in the Lion den too. So I'd rather just skip that whole year. And I doubt my daughter will miss much. I doubt my son would have missed much skipping Tiger, and half of his Wolf den was first-year scouts, many who had older siblings and knew Tiger year was a waste. I'd skip Tiger with my daughter too, but she's already too aware of Cub Scouts and I have a feeling just skipping Lion will be about as much of a delay as she will let me live with. I just watched a bunch of really anxious Webelos cross over to troops last week, and they could not have been more ready. They were tired of the Cub program, ready to move on. And they didn't do Lions, I don't know how many did Tiger. I'd be willing to bet a lot of those kids wouldn't have been crossing over if they had spent an extra year in Cubs earlier on. We had 3 Webelos not even show up to cross over, they already basically quit earlier in the year. Tiger burns kids out on Cubs but many still make it all the way through. Lions will kill enthusiasm for Cubs by the time these kids are in 3rd or 4th grade. Parents? They'll be done even earlier.

I discovered my career because of the BSA. And it has nothing to do with the outdoors. The BSA has been in the business of offering exposure to a wide variety of topics for a long time now. STEM is just the latest addition. It's certainly not "idiotic".

I still never thought there would be any "jump" involved, a jump in numbers or a jump-start of any kind. This is going to be a long process, rolling out the opportunities for girls and building a culture of girls in the Cub Scouts and Scouts BSA programs. That's ultimately what will drive membership increases, more girls seeing other girls doing things in Cubs, SBSA, etc. There are still a whole lot of those "Well how is this going to work?" questions on the minds of parents. I hear them often, from parents of girls who are interested but still unsure about participating. Because they haven't seen it in action yet, other than in the stock photos the BSA put out last year. Now when I do recruiting this year, I'll have girls in uniform at my open house, girls in school talking about Cub Scouts, and Pack girls in photos on my website, flyers, etc. I think that will start to resonate more with prospective new parents. We're definitely moving in a better direction. I'm better off this year than I was last year in terms of being able to speak to how this all works and potentially bring in more new girl members this year. I think if we look at a "jump start" in terms other than raw membership numbers, I'd say we're already experiencing that jump. And I still believe that the numbers jump will follow. It just needs more time.

National does some interesting math. Everyone knew there would be some fall-out from admitting girls, there was almost no way that we'd see any kind of increase in overall numbers. That's at least a few years out. I'd be surprised if we even see a leveling-off in a couple of years.

Did anyone really think we'd see that jump in less than a year? I certainly didn't. I always figured this was a 5-year minimum to get any real sense of how things would go. I never even looked at it as a "jump". It would always be a long, slow progression and a leveling-off after the early years of ups and downs.

I'm pretty sure this is just about the single best way to sum up any involvement in Scouting as a leader. 🤣