BAJ

My daughter and I are signed up as well. Fingers crossed.

@TAHAWK Thanks very much — very informative.

Is there truly Superfund-level cleanup liability at the site? I knew it was a former mine, but if there is toxic contamination at that level I’m surprised it was adapted as a site for youth camping.

When I was a scout in the 1980s, I was a member of a troop that was not diverse, not because of anything that the Scouts had done, but because I grew up in an area where African American families were redlined out of their ability to live for an extended period of time. I didn't know that as a young scout, though as I got somewhat older and learned some of the complicated history of race and politics in the area I came to understand that the way things were when I was a kid depended on things that had been done many years before. It wasn't a value judgement about my troop or its actions, it wasn't a judgement about me, but the fact that it wasn't my fault didn't make it any less the reality and didn't make it any less unfair. I heard stories about issues of racism in Scouting, and I certainly witnessed events that made clear to me that the legacy of what had been done intentionally before -- and the reality of things that were still happening then -- meant that there were still forces and realities that affected some members of society in ways that I was not affected as a white learning-to-be-a-man. As a result, I can say I was proud when I received that email from BSA a few days ago, and -- though some have said that creating a new merit badge isn't substantial -- I thought that was actually a valuable step BSA could take in accordance with what Scouting is supposed to do, educate youth into valuable members of society. The requirements that are put in place are a statement by the organization of what is important. Swimming requirements have been in place for a long time. Sustainability became a merit badge when that was viewed as important. And now something focused on diversity and inclusion is being added as important. The goal of the program is to teach, and -- if the new badge is designed well, which given the references to American Cultures and American Heritage, I expect it to be -- I believe that it could make a real contribution to the youth that earn it understanding the complicated history of race in this country, since ignorance of that complexity is not a help in finding a path forward. I know that some of the merit badges I took as a scout had a lasting impact on my thinking, and I have watched my daughter grow through some of the citizenship and other merit badges she has been working on as well. In other places this has been characterized as a knee jerk reaction, but I am not sure that I see that. Having returned to scouting not too long ago since BSA opened to my daughter and because I agreed with the organization's changes to become more tolerant with respect to sexual orientation, I was planning on going to the Wood Badge session before coronavirus disrupted it -- since I felt that it was important that I learned what the organization thought I needed to know to do a good job. One of my mentors related to our current troop, a very long tenured Scouter, gave me a heads up that an element of diversity and inclusion had been part of the Wood Badge curriculum for some time now, and that I should think about how that would be part of my ticket -- though since I was working with a female troop, my ticket might be viewed as having that already as a part of it. So I don't see this as knee jerk, even if it is responding to events that are happening in real time. I also would push back on the characterizations of the content of that statement being anti-police and so somehow BSA not being "pro-police," and -- furthermore -- push back on setting up discussion as a conflict between people protesting for their rights and law enforcement. The history of policing in this country is also complicated, with extreme good and extreme ill. Use of force does fall more heavily on some than others, and the outcomes of interactions between law enforcement and individuals can differ based on more than just their behavior when that interaction happens. And the legacy of what law enforcement has been used for in our country's history, like the past events that led my troop to be all white, still have effects that persist to the present day. And before you tell me I don't understand police, I do. I work with police officers as part of my job. In watching through even the imperfect window that posted cell phone video has given into what has happened in the recent protests, I have seen much to be amazingly proud of in the officers who have successfully both protected public order and protected citizens' exercise of their Constitutional rights. That doesn't surprise me given some of the men and women I know who are officers and since the oath most of those officers took was to uphold the Constitution, so they have a responsibility to do both. But I have also seen behavior by officers that I cannot defend, even as someone who has much more knowledge about police tactics, equipment, and procedures than the average person and is less likely to jump to conclusions based on always incomplete evidence. I also am surprised to have seen in these postings over the last few days a thread of argument that it should be ok for things to be different in troops across the country, and that top down intervention to impose something like this new merit badge is somehow inappropriate. That has surprised me because, in so many other discussions, the argument seems to always be that there should be uniformity and fundamental standards, with statements like "the program is the program," "units that aren't doing the Patrol Method properly are doing it wrong," and "things must be done with the spirit of Scouting in mind." Some of that push back was in response to some posts of mine where I was asking questions that were interpreted as pushing boundaries beyond what scouting should be. But now, when this is the issue, local variation is now presented as the ideal rather than undermining the program. That troubles me and that, as much as anything, was why I came back to post -- since some of the push back I'd gotten before had led me to the conclusion that perhaps I wasn't as welcome at this campfire as I thought it was and should limit myself to lurking in search of tidbits of information that National hadn't yet gotten around to disseminating broadly to volunteers. When I came back to Scouting, I had been impressed by how things were changing. When my daughter said she wanted to join Scouts BSA -- since she'd been more interested in the stories I told about when I was a scout than what she'd heard about what our local girl scout troops were doing -- I actually sat down to have a sober talk with her about what she might be getting into. I prepared her for, frankly, discrimination because of how people might react to the change of co-ed Scouting based on what I remembered from my time as a scout years ago. Interesting that in an organization supposedly fully centered in the Scout Oath and Law, that was my concern going in. But she wasn't worried, and - at least so far - it turns out she was right. Even at a camporee far afield from our largely suburban area, the few small female troops who were there didn't get any more flak than the boy troops did, and when some came their way they -- and the scouts from their "brother troop" -- stood side by side and, in both a friendly and courteous way, explained to the source that they weren't living up to the Scout Oath and Law. And subsequently, when she started working on Scouting Heritage merit badge and was interviewing some of the people who were involved in the forming of their troop, I got more insight into why: when it was being discussed, there was actually some opposition among some adults to the idea of starting a female troop, so the committee decided to ask some members of the existing boy troop what they thought about the idea. And they advocated for doing it because they thought it was important. So, in this case, the "progressiveness" that I have heard criticized elsewhere on this board, with the implication it was coming from adults like me, was scout led. Which I have also heard here is how it should be done. Do I think a new merit badge will solve the complexities of race in America? No, but it is a step to provide an opportunity for some of the next generation to at least be exposed to some of the complicated history about it and think it through for themselves. My daughter learned more from one of the citizenship merit badge requirements that required her to rewrite a passage from one of our Founding documents in her own words than a week of some of her classes in school. In the scouts I have had the privilege to help support over the last few months, I have seen extremely intelligent and impressive individuals. I doubt that all will reach the same conclusions as they do the requirements of such a merit badge as I might, and I doubt that -- whatever the political persuasion of the author of the pamphlet -- the conclusions they will reach can be predetermined. But, it can expose them to some history that they might not encounter elsewhere, and then they will decide what they think for themselves. And, just as I think regarding the requirements of many other merit badges, we will all be better for that.

I have a somewhat less critical reading of many of the posts there than you had (I read less that posters feel it is unjust that some will miss out on the opportunity to earn Eagle and more that there is a lot of frustration and disappointment on the part of leaders — including leaders of female troops — with new scouts where COVID has disrupted their scouting journey very soon after they started to build up engagement and momentum). That said, if you missed it, I’d recommend the question about Dog Care merit badge asking whether the badge could be earned with a cat.

Having only come back to scouting a year and a half ago, I have definitely seen the popularity of MB fairs (and seen them done both very well and less well also)... but I don’t think the days of scouts being the ones making contact with MB counselors are entirely gone. I had my daughter start reach out to a Scholarship MB counselor (not associated with our or our linked troop) as an almost new scout, and when I replied to one of the intervening emails about a location to meet, the counselor politely reminded me (in a separate email chain) that it was the scout’s responsibility to do the logistical coordination. I really respected how he educated me too, and — by her choice, but enthusiastically supported by me — she’s returned to him for another badge he counsels since. As a copied leader on an email from another parent to an in-troop counselor, I saw a different counselor do essentially the same thing. So, still some (admittedly anecdotal) signs of life in that element of adult association...

Hopefully, not that different. But, I’ve seen business enterprise management system change overs — where in theory the fact that their business “wasn’t that different from other similar businesses” meant the switch should have been smooth result in long term disruptions...

When I read the point about new IT systems on the other end of bankruptcy I had a similar reaction, but my dominant feeling was honestly worry. I’ve seen well resourced and technically sophisticated organizations take a huge hit when putting in the “new high tech cloud based solution” that is going to make everything so much better ends up being much tougher than it seemed on paper. In an organization that is already seriously wounded and likely without any spare resources, my fear is that an “upgrade effort” under those circumstances could mean that everything grinds to a halt.

In the minutes to our district Roundtable this week, they shared that at this point a third of BSA camps nationwide have announced being closed for the summer.

I could get to the Circular through another path - probably something wrong with the link on the main page. NCAP-Circular-No-14-002-2.pdf

In the small ones they were individually tested for the major "demonstrate" requirements (e.g., each individually giving presentations required, etc.), and -- at least in principle -- their participation in discussion was related to meeting the "discuss" type requirements. In the larger ones, the individual testing was all about written work/filling in worksheets -- so very "schoolified" in that case.

We’ve had scouts try a few of the online MB options from around the country. Experience has been varied, generally correlated — inversely — with maximum enrollment size. I get that some of the councils are doing massive classes to try to serve more scouts (and I really feel for the logistical and record keeping challenges some have gotten themselves into), but the very big ones have been very similar to “web based training” that most of us have experienced at work. They haven’t inspired any excitement about the subject of the badges in the scouts, even of they “got them thru the requirements.” Some of the smaller ones (some as small as 10-15 scouts) and that had a decent length of time to actually been interactive and engaging have been much more effective.

Not an intellectual property lawyer, but if GSUSA also didn’t defend the “scout” trademark in those contexts, that could actually be a pretty potent argument in fighting that particular stressor that BSA is currently dealing with.

Accepting the critique that I’ve been flagged here as a bad example for the way that I worded my original post, I’m honestly struggling here with how the last few posts have framed service and service hour requirements as distinct from other requirements for advancement in scouting. A central reason particular skills, behaviors or actions are included in requirements for advancement is that they are elements that Scouting seeks to convey to the youth that are participants. Outdoor skills are required for lower rank advancement because that is central to transmitting the core of the outdoor program to young scouts early. Citizenship in the Nation and Personal Management are Eagle required because both the knowledge and skills inherent in both are something that the program believes should be conveyed to every scout on their path to Eagle. And service - implemented as service hours - are required because scouting is seeking to convey a desire to help others and contribute to the community. Certainly, it would be ideal if every scout served more than “required” and yes, many do, unprompted by a requirement to do so, and that there were no scouts who sought opportunities to serve “just for rank advancement.” But I see no reason why that same logic shouldn’t apply to all other requirements as well — all scouts should want to learn knot tying unprompted by a requirement to so. All scouts should want to be engaged in their community, so why require attendance at a city council meeting as merit badge requirements? It seems to me the reason service hours are required is to prompt scouts who wouldn’t organically do them to try. Some will then fully absorb the lesson about service at a deep level, and service will become a core part of their scouting experience and hopefully their adult life. Some won’t, and for them the required hours will be Scouting’s effort to teach a lesson that maybe didn’t fully “take” (just as some scouts come thru scouting and camp “enough” to meet their requirements, but never develop a deep love of being in the outoors.) So, while I am not trying to “just be defensive” about being flagged as a bad example of adult leadership this early in my leadership career, in part I am, since I just don’t see why a scout being prompted to serve because of a requirement to do so or a leader seeking opportunities for them to do so...

My daughter is doing Personal Fitness remotely now. She’d actually met in person with the counselor once before all this started and is now doing tele-meetings every three or four weeks to talk progress on her program and talk through one or more requirements (first one under quarantine was last week, with me hanging by for YPT compliance). His flexibility and hers schedulewise meant that discussion was likely longer and in more depth than it would’ve been with the face to face model. Working really well so far (and doing the fitness program is helping manage the time in stay-at-home mode too.

I certainly agree that the important element is for the scouts to be at home, sheltering in place — since that is what is important for containing this as best we can — and that is fundamentally what I am worrying about, even in asking this question. In our (admittedly small) troop and in the larger troop linked to us, we have been looking for ways some scouting activities can be continued under these conditions. For kids that are likely to be cooped up for weeks most likely, our view was that at least attempting to continue Scouting could be part of giving them a structure and making “doing what they need to do” to minimize spread both more bearable and sustainable. I wasn’t trying to imply that continuing their advancement was more important than public health, our hope is that if we can find ways to facilitate them doing so that could be part of protecting public health.

We have a few scouts who were looking for service opportunities to get service hours for rank before COVID hit. Obviously many of the usual opportunities for troop service are off the table given restrictions on group gatherings and close contact. Does anyone have creative suggestions for ways Scouts could serve under shelter in place or near quarantine conditions? Figuring out a way to reach out via Skype or video to older people who must isolate was one that could be valuable (equivalent to traditional nursing home visits), but it wasn’t obvious how to make that work. Does the collective wisdom here have other ideas how scouts could serve under these uncertain conditions?

The Guide to Advancement says no in most cases — “Once work has begun, the Scout may continue using the requirements he or she started with until completion of the badge. Alternatively, the Scout may choose to switch to the revised requirements. Sometimes, however— especially for more significant changes—the Scouts BSA Handbook, the Scouts BSA Requirements book, www. scouting.org/meritbadges, or official communications from the National Council may set forth a different procedure that must be used and may establish a date by when use of the old requirements must cease.”

Since I expect to get this question from Scouts after an OA election tomorrow, does anyone know whether there is any precedent for change in the ‘OA election is good for one year’ if the Ordeal gets cancelled because of communicable disease concerns?