walk in the woods

Hmmm, not sure why Shooting Sports would need any DEI requirements/discussion.  The firearms, bows, and wrist-rockets don't give a damn about the person using them. 

That said, I guess you could start with the racist history of gun control laws intended to keep firearms out of the hands of slaves, freedmen, and Indians (I think we call these folks BIPOC individuals today).  You could then continue with a discussion of how that continues today with the harshest gun laws in the nation having a disproportionate impact, up to and  including incarceration, on black populations in large cities.  Then close the discussion with the logical conclusion that all gun control laws much be abolished due to their historical systemic racism. 

https://www.theatlantavoice.com/articles/gun-control-historically-has-meant-prohibiting-blacks-from-owning-one/

https://www.today.com/news/2-boy-scouts-rescue-drowning-woman-missouri-floodwaters-t224158

2 hours ago, GrammaScout said:

We've had the discussion wondering what would stop a family from suing the place where the Facilities are used.  So not being the CO wouldn't make any difference.

Nothing would stop them and there would be no difference.

Every child is different.  My son's first round of vaccines, his autism diagnosis, and the Wakefield study all happened within a few months of each other.  We stopped all his remaining vaccines.  When school rolled around, the docs offered to run titers to check his immunity.  I think he hoped they would be low to convince us to do the boosters.  Turns out they were good all the way through his school years.

21 hours ago, 69RoadRunner said:

That changed with the discredited anti-vaxxer movement that claimed vaccines caused Autism.

To be clear, the claim that MMR vaccines cause autism was published in the Lancet, a peer-reviewed journal, in 1998.  It took many years for it to be debunked, and not before the Wakefield study results were all over the evening news.  The "anti-vaxxer movement" didn't create the claim, Dr. Wakefield did, and following the publicity of the study, the movement.  Only later did we find out he was funded by a law firm looking to sue MMR manufacturers.  Those of us who have children with autism, who were of vaccine receiving ages between 1998 and roughly 2004, were forced to make decisions in that maelstrom.  So, let's put the blame where it belongs, Dr. Wakefield's unethical behavior, a peer-review system that didn't catch it, and the sensationalism of the evening news, rather than the sophistry of some anti-vax movement making the claim.

Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent | The BMJ

15 minutes ago, yknot said:

I hope you're right but I do want to point out that most of the growth, and interest, in scouting is in non first world countries. I'm not so sure WOSM cares all that much about the US. Also in general, even in third world countries, there is declining interest and support for organizations that are perceived as vestiges of colonialism. Scouting's connection to someone who fought in the Boer War in Colonial South Africa and was so associated with the British elite upper class does not augur well for the future given how social trends are going. It's a net negative and the only reason it hasn't been a bigger issue is because people really haven't looked. The general public knows nothing about WOSM but say "Imperialist" and they react right away. 

I suspect WOSM will care.  I may be wrong but I believe the first world countries effectively subsidize the growth in the non first world.

2 hours ago, elitts said:

But as far as I'm aware, most, if not all, of the settlements thus-far have been funded by insurance policies.

Insurance policies paid for by your dues and council chartering fees.  Insurance isn't free.

10 hours ago, Owls_are_cool said:

Nobody associated with my troop will want to pay a dime towards any settlement, because none of us participated in the abuse. We're here to invest in scouts today, not to bail out scouters who were not held accountable decades ago. Making scouts sell popcorn, etc for such bailouts to keep the program running is just wrong. 

That horse left the barn years ago.  The BSA has settled multiple cases in and out of court already.  You've already paid.

10 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

USC has a $5B endowment.  They can pay this without bankruptcy or selling buildings and firing anyone.  I think that is the big difference.   BSA has made large payouts in the past $19.9M to a single victim.  I think the current situation has more to do with the mass claims and limited assets instead of who the actual victims are.  

Assuming parts of the endowment aren't restricted.

1 hour ago, ThenNow said:

Maybe they go to LA where he is. That may be the push. 

Yeah, if he's making a COVID argument and suggesting CA, he'll get the same argument thrown back in his face.

14 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

2019. All martial arts Page 41-42

The Boy Scouts of America prohibits the following activities (with exceptions in italics):

....

13. Activities where participants strike at each other, including martial arts, boxing, combat games, gladiator games, and reenactment activities such as live action role-playing games (LARP) and Society for Creative Anachronism (SCA) activities (exception: tai chi)

https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/34416.pdf

The prohibited activity in that paragraph is "strike at each other" and nothing more.  I'd take that to mean martial arts, boxing, etc. are all fine as long as the scouts are striking at training dummies, heavy bags, pig carcasses, etc.  It works for this Girl Scout troop in Iowa.

9 hours ago, swilliams said:

I mentioned upthread a ways that our troop went once - it would have been around 2005 or 2006 - and we never went back again.

The BSA acquired the land for the Summit in 2009/2010 timeframe, the opening event was the 2013 National Jamboree.  The first year of summer programs for units was 2014.  You might be thinking about a different place if your troop went in 2005/2006.

On 3/11/2021 at 9:07 AM, InquisitiveScouter said:

But, a minority of parents would not let their Scouts participate, nor would let their Scouts attend any events (including meetings) on the property while the ranges were open.

Just curious if those same parents refused to let their scouts participate in summer camp because ranges were open?

11 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

Not your fault.  
I hope BSA goes back to their documents and really looks at what are restricted assets and offers everything else.   Then build a non CO model as I expect COs are gone..  Then settle with protection for the LCs and let the COs fend for themselves.

If they do this, BSA can survive.  I just don’t trust BSA’s leadership and I think they will realize this too late in the process and we will lose most of our camps.  

So where are your council-owned units going to meet?  Do you really think if lawsuits start hitting your local churches, Legion Posts, Firemen's Associations, and VFW Halls, that any of them will ever let a BSA unit in their buildings again?  They'll close down their facilities to all youth serving organizations in a heartbeat.

Every time I read "heads on pikes" I get this image of them being along the road at the entrance to the Summit as scouters are bused in for summer re-education camp! 🤪

28 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

I would suggest that one of the best things the BSA could do is to have a mandatory 30 minute parent YPT training as well. 

Is this not the entire purpose of requirement 6 of the Scout Rank?

Quote

6. With your parent or guardian, complete the exercises in the pamphlet How to Protect Your Children From Child Abuse: A Parent’s Guide and earn the Cyber Chip Award for your grade.1

3 hours ago, Eagle1993 said:

A lot of this has to be Covid impact, correct?  Are the 2020 numbers late 2020 or January 2020.  If they are January 2020 we are in SERIOUS trouble.  If late 2020, I think it will bounce back.

the other thread with these numbers said December 2020.  Not sure if that includes the 2021 recharter year or not.

48 minutes ago, scoutldr said:

I have always heard that our scout Reservation was donated to our Council in 1958, and the deed specifies that if it is ever no longer wanted/needed, the deed is to revert back to the family.  Not sure how true (or legal) that is

Well, I can say it's at least possible.  In the mid-70s, the church I used to attend built a new building and "donated" their old church building to the local historical society to operate as a museum and wedding/lecture venue.  There was a reversion clause in the donation contract.  In the early 2000s, the historical society decided to sell the old church because it needed maintenance and a nearby private school wanted the ground.  The church invoked the reversion clause, took back ownership of the building/grounds, formed a new NFP corporation to manage the property, and put it back into operation for weddings and lectures and such.  

Now, how that would have played out in a bankruptcy court I can't say.  

If you want to get really depressed, here are the 2010 numbers (https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/420-118.pdf)

You can certainly see the impact on Venturing of the 2017 LDS departure from that program.  

8 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

And this was just 2020 (first year of major LDS impact)

2021 charter year data (units rechartering in late fall 2020 to December 2020) is going to reflect the COVID hits and be a disaster.

I'm betting Cubs go below 1 million.

Well, that's a good bet considering the 2020 Cubs number is just under 650,000.  Seems like this membership drop can't totally be explained by the LDS departure.  Articles from the time of the 2018 announcement (they'd already dropped Venturing the year before) said LDS boys accounted for 18.5% of the 2.3 million members.  Estimates I recall said 450,000 members, give or take, which is consistent with the math in the linked article.  So the LDS departure can only explain about half of the almost million member loss over the last two years.  It would be interesting to know how the December 2020 numbers were counted.  If they are still counting members from units with "late" charter packets, then yeah, 2021 will be problematic.

My question is what is the critical mass of Cubs required to keep Scouts BSA alive?  A 1.4:1 ratio doesn't seem like enough.

8 hours ago, ThenNow said:

I don't know the detail or if there is anything substantive involved, but doesn't National present an annual report to Congress on the state of Scouting? (I've often wondered why/how the matter of the abuse has been avoided in that discussion, but that's another point.)

It's in the Annual Report, well, the Treasurers Report.  Here's the report from 2017 (the most recent one I could find) https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Treasurers-Report-2017-Final.pdf.  If you read down to the Contingencies section on Page 22 you'll find this:

Quote

The National Council maintains insurance for various types of damages, including general liability losses. Depending on the policy terms, a portion of the potential claims, representing deductibles or aggregate excess limits, are selfinsured by the National Council. Reserves are maintained for estimated self-insured losses.

The National Council has been named as a defendant in several lawsuits alleging inappropriate conduct by local council employees or Scouting unit volunteers, including allegations of conduct that did not occur within Scouting and allegations of incidents dating back as far as the early 1960s. The National Council is also aware of threatened and expanding litigation of a similar nature. Most of the cases claim specific amounts of compensatory damages and, in a few cases, unspecified amounts of punitive damages.

There continues to be additional lawsuits filed alleging sexual abuse, including claims for punitive damages. The National Council could be required to pay damages out of its own funds to the extent the claims are not covered by insurance or if the insurance carriers are unable or unwilling to honor the claims. Based upon the nature of and management’s understanding of the facts and circumstances that give rise to such actions and claims, management believes the reserves established by the General Liability Insurance Program of the National Council are sufficient to provide for the resolution of these lawsuits. However, in the event the General Liability Insurance Program or its reserves are insufficient to resolve such claims, it is the opinion of the National Council that the total amount of payments to resolve current and future claims could have a significant impact on the financial position or results of operations of the National Council in the future.

9 hours ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

Mike Rowe?

Creek Stewart.

6 hours ago, CynicalScouter said:

This is to my understanding not a Council issue but BSA. Districts are not allowed to have their own accounts/fund or to keep/retain money. ALL funds are directed or revert to Council.

To confirm yes, all funds raised in the name of Scouting are Council's (other than unit fundraising) or National's. You therefore are not permitted to maintain your own accounts/"pot of money."

How hard would it be for the Council to just keep a ledger.  Money comes in from a camporee it goes into the council account and a credit entry is made in the district ledger.  Expenses for the event are paid from the council account anNd a debit is entered in the district ledger.  Camporee makes money there is a credit balance in the ledger to start the next event.  It would require council to keep their hands off the actual money though.

It's been a few years since I had to deal with JTE, so maybe these complaints about the process are no longer valid.  But, that won't stop me from writing them anyway :).  

1. Even in the pre-scoutbook era, the BSA had almost all the information they needed to calculate JTE from recharter info, Tour Permits (remember those?), the service hour website (what was that called, service to america or something), etc.  JTE should have been a 0 second effort for any unit serving vol other than entering data during the year.  Turn in your recharter in December, wait three months for the BSA to rekey everything into their systems, have a nice announcement at the district dinner.  In the Scoutbook era this absolutely should be a 0 second effort for unit volunteers.

2. No scout anywhere, ever, should hear the letters JTE uttered by an adult.  The only exception I might make to that rule is when the SM works with the SPL on planning ideas.  Even then it shouldn't be "JTE requires us to perform X service projects" rather, "Hey, we should consider putting together a service projects."  JTE is some management consultant's wet dream.  No scout should be exposed to that.

3. The camping metrics are meaningless.  For example, if a unit of 30 scouts holds 10 campouts they check off gold.  It doesn't matter if they have an average of 5 attending or 25.  It's a meaningless number.  If we really want to measure the effectiveness of the camping program the metric should be something like percentage of available scout camping nights.  If the gold goal is 10 weekend campouts per year, that's 20 camping nights per scout.  If you have 30 scouts that's a total of 600 hours.  Make the gold metric then 90% of scout camping nights.  Maybe make it 90% of total and 60% per scout.  Same thing applies to long-term summer camp.  It should be a percentage of total available scout camping nights.  Again, in the Scoutbook era, this should be easily calculated by the backend systems.

4. Same argument as number 3 for service hours.

5. The advancement metric while well meaning, drives the Eagle Mill mentatlity.  OMG!  JTE says everyone has to advance one rank!!!!!  I don't know what the metric should be but it's not this.

One other thought, the management quotes from earlier are missing the qualifying clause.  They should be something like "Whatever gets measured gets managed, to the exclusion of everything else."  JTE is the BSAs version of teaching to the test.

15 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

So, what happens if you don't meet the goal?  or the "year over year improvement"???

Stop recruiting boys in order to protect your bonus? 🤣