desertrat77

We've done several threads about this over the years, always a good discussion. Long story short, I think allowing girls in the BSA would be beneficial for everyone. It would certainly give the BSA a much needed boost of new membership and energy. However, several respected forum members disagree, and I understand their concerns. The GSA would survive. Not in grand fashion, but much like it is now. If the BSA went coed, the outdoor-oriented folks would move over from the GSA. But I doubt there are many of those folks left in the GSA.

Have we really run out of things to discuss? Is it time for a new WB bashing thread?

For many years, I've been more than happy to write a check to avoid peddling stale/overpriced candy/popcorn/cookies, smelly candles and other junk that no one really wants. If they need help setting up the school carnival, hauling gear for the troop, or serving as a timer at the swim meet, sure, no problem. Selling stuff? No. I will not impose on family, coworkers and neighbors to buy rubbish to support my kid.

Creek or Rowe, both would excel. But it would never happen. When was the last time you saw a dynamic, fit, outdoorsman/woman under the age of 50 serving in any senior role in the BSA? Exactly.

Qwazse, thank you for sharing...powerful! I also concur with your title. You could give National a year and an unlimited budget, and they could never produce anything as professional as what we just watched.

Bad Wolf, In AK this time of year, you can golf around the clock, almost...plenty of daylight...I imagine he could squeeze in a couple rounds

Eamonn, these words are the testament...well done. I can identify with your observations about after school activities. I had similar thoughts and experiences. For my eldest daughter, I sat through many an awful high school soccer game (their coach didn't coach, he just collected the extra pay). And the band parents! They really are hyper-involved. Very much concur regarding scouting and equipment...the parents buy all of this Gucci gear, and Johnny may not like scouting after all. I think our scouting forefathers were very wise in keeping things simple. The basic canvas BSA Yucca pack was cheap and functional. Fold two or three blankets from home together, use some giant safety pins, and they had a sleeping bag. Buy an official canteen or get one from the army surplus store for a song. Even for the scouts that stayed with the program, the simple gear worked fine.

I checked the summation and concur. The BSA hanging on to a bloated, inefficient management model that just isn't sustainable. It doesn't serve anyone but themselves. But no one wants to be the one to put the sacred cow out to pasture, not after years of striving to get to the upper rungs. It's interesting to look back over the years and think about how things have changed at district level and above. Back in scouting's heyday, they manually processed everything, served numerous units, and yet did it with smaller staffs. Yet they did it with alot more courtesy, speed, and efficiency than anything I've seen today. I get the sense that Mr. Gates was brought in for one reason: to launch the new membership/leadership policy. I must admit I'm disappointed that he hasn't enacted the same climate of change within the BSA in its entirely, as he did with the DoD when he was SECDEF.

Good points all. As far as funding the pyramid, I have already been mulling over my annual FOS donation. For a couple weeks now. I will not contribute to FOS again. If there is a fundraiser to improve a council camp (upgrade pool, buy a new dishwasher for the mess hall), I'll gladly give for a specific project. Same with a summer camp scholarship. I haven't bought popcorn in years. Instead, I donate 20 bucks directly to the unit each time I'm asked. Confuses the scouts a bit a first, but leaders appreciate it. Money goes straight into their coffers. I'm not paying middle management salaries, and I'm not loaded down with a bunch of broccoli-flavored popcorn, or whatever they are pushing this year.

Very true. As you and Joe Bob pointed out, it's become apparent that the BSA is a pyramid scheme. Plus, based on Calico's last post, National is slowly divesting the outdoor competency for indoor stuff--because that's where society is going. Well, those who still like the outdoors will have it all to themselves! Good news for the troops that are outdoor oriented and self sufficient.

So society is camping less. Should the BSA just shrug its collective shoulders, and camp less too? Just plop down on the sofa and settle in? Heck no. Many kids want to be outdoors. They just don't know how to get there. This is the BSA's golden opportunity to reestablish its reputation as an outdoor organization. Not every kid will sign up, but enough will. However, the standard hike along a nice rolling path, or the typical BSA tailgate/horsetrailer campout, isn't very inspiring. There must be more adventure than that. Provide it, and the scouts will stay. There are obstacles. One, many adults in our society today are indoor types, tried and true. Two, many adults in the BSA itself are not only indoor types, but anti-outdoor as well (which still astounds me!). Look at those troops that are thriving. They are outdoors, and challenging their scouts. Not sitting in town. So less people are camping? All the better! Scouts will have the outdoors to themselves, with the bonus of bucking the tide that is encouraging poor health and inertia

I don't doubt that. Lots of uninspired, Sad Sack scouting out there. Leadership makes a difference.

Some companies can diversify their product line and still make a profit. But it's tough to do. More often than not, companies diversify, bleed for awhile, divest as much as they can, and get back to their original core competency. The BSA can't properly promote it's own core competency/number 1 product: outdoor adventure. National has tried every way they can to screw up outdoor-focused programming. Then they double down and introduce new programs that have little/nothing to do with the outdoors. Two problems: the BSA mismanages these new programs to the nth degree. And usually, right across the street, there is an established organization that already offers these same programs. Is a youth going to leave a good soccer league or science club to attend the BSA program? Doubtful. I'm not anti-science. Quite the contrary. I like the old phrase "stick to the knitting." If science is your thing, then find a science club that is lead by scientists in a scientific setting (local community college, etc.). Joining a science club organized by a historically outdoor-focused organization that can't even focus on the outdoors...that's not a recipe for success.

I have no doubt that science is more popular than scouting in some communities. But I must ask: what is the state of scouting in your community? Is it a dynamic, outdoor-drive program? Or is it sedentary/meeting oriented? If it's the latter, then heck yes, science will win. However, if there is a good scouting program (always outdoors), it will give science a run for its money.

Right! Same science they did at school, fourth period biology, last Tuesday, except this time repeat the lab on the weekend. After that, they can watch a video about a scientist doing some super cool stuff in another state. Then listen to a guy talk about some nifty scientific concepts he learned in grad school. Then watch another dude who has been a scientist quite awhile perform an awesome experiment but regretfully the scouts can't do it themselves because of safety reasons. Wrap up the day observing a guy operate a robot...well...maybe not, the software is acting up...worked this morning...doggone it...well you get the idea. See you next Saturday!

In the midst of the storms that surround the BSA (many created by the BSA itself), here is my one nugget of hopefulness: Any time a scout experiences traditional, historic, adventure-driven, outdoor scouting, they are hooked. The appeal of traditional scouting transcends the differences of generations and demographics. Though times and tastes change, traditional scouting appeals to the kid of 2015 the same way it did for a kid from 1915. However, our society has rationalized, minimized and otherwise rejected much of our past in the name of "progress" and "sophistication" and other such self-congratulatory rubbish. The scouts don't need more lectures on "leadership" and "self worth." They need to organize into a patrol, pick a leader, make some sandwiches, fill canteens, and go hiking.

Same here, I'm in a district now that says "yes" and although we are still woefully understaffed, it's okay because the camaraderie is great, the focus is on the units, and it's all a welcome change from my four previous district experiences elsewhere. PS Please take care of that shoulder!

Excellent point!

STEM is just another program that will bleed away resources from the BSA's true core competency: the great outdoors. Recruiting pitch: "Who wants more homework?!"

I'm also jumping between the two district threads..... A semi-pertinent thought: when did districts become the bureaucratic organizations that many are now? As an SPL, my SM always took me to district RT. I knew the district staffers from RT, the spring camporee and fall freezoree. They were friendly. Helpful. Respectful. Superb outdoorsmen. And there were only about four of them, including the DE. Strong leaders but stayed behind the scene. I looked up to all of them. I age out, then come back to scouting four years later as an ASM in another part of the country, go to the district RT, and am shocked at the number of people on district staff. And a goodly percentage of them are people who are clearly District Types. In a nutshell, the exact opposite template of my previous impressions and experiences. They provided little/no service to the units, were focused on fundraising and grabbing good scouters out of units, and liked to throw their weight around at camporees and such.

The bad districts we speak of do not want help, nor change. Offer to help, and you are refused. Make suggestions and receive stony silence as feedback. Or condescension. Believe it or not, unit level scouters can make intelligent assessments about districts and district staffs. Being an unpaid volunteer, the unit level scouter is under zero obligation to attempt to ingratiate him/herself into the orbit of a bunch of self-absorbed district scouters, particularly ones that have no interest in the welfare of the units they allegedly serve.. Mr./Ms. Unit Scouter has much better things to do in life. The district is not an essential organizer for multi-unit events. Units can contact other units and put together their own encampment or hike or whatever. Works just fine.

Eagle, I respectfully submit that that is not the issue with many districts. The issue is: you offer to help, and are told "no." You provide the names and CVs of great scouters who could fill vacancies and are told "no." These types of districts are not interested in change, though they need it badly.

We've covered this ground before as well. Summary: solid volunteers offer to help and are turned away; can't pass muster with the old boys until you've been there awhile; new volunteers don't bring their professional and personal experience to the district, they have to leave that behind and conform to the "way we've always done it here in X District" and they've always stunk. These bad districts exist. Happy thoughts, a big smile, a firm handshake, and being a good mixer does not grant one admission into their circle. One must leave ones expertise outside the door and spend years currying favor with the Olde Boys, agreeing with every idea they have, and otherwise doing business their way. And their way of doing business stinks, because it is of no value to the units, and as it pertains to the topic, the training is lousy but they are fine with it. Because it is their opportunity to lord over the unwashed unit level people. As I've mentioned before, I've been on district staffs in five different councils in five different parts of the country. Only one of the five matches your Utopian perspective of District Life, and that's because there was only a handful of good people trying to keep the ship afloat, and they welcomed people to join them. But even then, just the year before there were a couple of Olde Boys on that district staff that ran people off. The Olde Boys would rather have the ship sink that have someone with no knots or beads come in and run training differently than Good Old Jeff did for many years. Think about it. We can't be all defective and malcontents. Sometimes bad news is true.

If the training was any good, there would be fewer complaints. But it usually stinks. Summary: content is tedious and of little practical benefit; courses take too long; training cadres tend to be full of themselves and show little respect for the attendees. Give scouters some credit. They know a waste of time when they see it. They know they need training. But they won't tolerate mediocrity and disrespect.

Maybe it's the BSA's subtle way of introducing scouts to the BSA's template for adult volunteer leadership: work numerous hours, no pay, and forget about reimbursement for legit expenses!