Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by SilverPalm

  1. You know, that's a good point.  I think I will send National a letter, regardless of whether it makes a difference.  

    Any of us who are Eagle Scouts were charged to dedicate our skills and abilities to the common good.  Maybe this is a good place to start.   

    • Upvote 4
  2. I had the privilege of going to both Northern Tier and Seabase as a Scout, but we never did Philmont.  Seabase in particular provided an experience like no other I had in Scouting, and it would be a shame (though perhaps a necessary evil) to lose the High Adventure sites.

    Summit, on the other hand, I have no interest in.  It didn't exist when I was in the organization, and I suspect that many Scouters with even a recent Scouting pedigree would rather see it gone than to continue to watch National play this shell game.  

    This is the Boy Scouts. Pretending you can't surrender the exorbitantly expensive and least popular High Adventure site to double your offer to the abuse victims doesn't seem particularly Trustworthy, Kind, nor morally straight. 

    And as fond as I am of Seabase and of the legendary Philmont Ranch... I'd be a lot harder hit by losing the local camps.  IMO, National needs to recognize the writing on the wall here and do everything in their power to protect Scouting at a local level.  Yes, National owns the Eagle Scout title and the Supply department, but I for one would rather see Summit gone than my local campground. 

    What's a realistic best-case scenario here? National gets gutted and we keep one or two of the High Adventure sites, but local Councils keep local campsites and Scout Shops?  Is it even reasonable to hope to keep, say, Philmont and Seabase?  Seabase and Northern Tier?  Or do we think all the HA sites are most likely gone?

    Scouting has a debt to pay, and $6100 per claimant isn't reasonable.  What, then, is?

  3. Thank you!

    It's one thing if the leaders play along, but in my case our SM didn't.  Regardless, a number of the younger Scouts considered it bullying, and one or two even left the program over it... meaning it was unwelcome enough to those Scouts that they chose jettison the rest of the program merely to avoid what they saw as public humiliation.  While the older Scouts quickly corrected the culture, it was one problem that didn't need to exist in the first place IMO.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
  • Create New...