desertrat77

"One would think the trails and camps and remote areas are controlled by roving bands of thugs preying on innocent citizens" As a matter of fact, some remote places are controlled by thugs. Not all places. But some, definitely, yes. Not conjecture. Personal experience.

FOS should go away. The idea of shaking down parents and unit level leaders, a group that already carries the biggest financial burden of scouting, to pay for BSA overhead isn't right. Professional staffers at all levels should solicit funds from businesses and such to pay for the things that FOS alledgedly funds. If the number of pros and admin overhead is so critical to the movement, they themselves will figure out how to fund their operations. Or, if the fundraising is for something specific--a new roof on the old mess hall at camp--by all means, ask all, parents, leaders, alum, businesses. Many folks would welcome the opportunity to know EXACTLY what their money is going towards. But an open-ended pitch for money to fund organizational overhead? No thanks.

I've been in the boonies in lots of places...never worried much about bears or snakes. Just stayed aware and prepared. Humans are another story. There are places in our great country where you darn well better pack a gun. Certain patches of desert, down south by the border, come to mind. Certain times in life, your good intentions, high ideals, and friendly offer of a cup of coffee will not dissuade a dirtbag from evil. I understand the BSA policy about not carrying firearms. So please consult LE and forest service about places to camp where you'll be less likely to encounter sundry criminals, dope runners, dope growers, human traffickers, and the like. If you are in the boonies on your own time, be aware of where you are going, and if you need to carry a gun, carry it. Depending on the location, it isn't paranoia. Sometimes, it's just good common sense. Life insurance. Because the dirtbags are out there. I'll spare you my encounters with them, but rest assured, they are out there.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

VigilNavyCPO, I understand where you are coming from...there are many days I feel the same way. Please consider coming back. The only way the BSA can withstand the current tsunami of Irving-sanctioned mediocrity is by seasoned folks, like yourself, championing true scouting at the unit level. Best wishes for the holidays, desertrat

Previous district..... District was basically chopped in two. Half stayed in the old council, the other half went to another council. (This happened a couple years before my arrival.) Result: lingering angst. Big differences between the districts/councils in programming, resources provided by the council, etc. The half of the district that stayed with the council (the one I was in) was clearly the council step child, even before the reorg. Became even more apparent when the other half that went away got a big jump in support. Best thing that ever happened to the half that went to the new council.

Qwazse, good points all. I think the good things you mentioned can/do happen independently of the existence of shoulder loops. I have no issue with the scouts being proud of the transition from one level to another. We used to signify this with different neckerchiefs and uniform items. Council/area positions: effectiveness and support for units vary greatly. The tread seems to be increasing overhead rather than support for units.

I agree with Eamonn, the loops are a waste. From what I've seen, the only people in the BSA that get a thrill from the pecking order are the ones wearing gold and silver. Which is rather ironic, given that the unit-level loops carry the most honor. That's where real scouting happens--pack, troop, crew, ship. Anything that happens at silver and gold level is overhead/bureaucracy/meetings/banquets.

Combining the three dull Citizenship MBs into one is a great idea...cool/uncool is in the eye of the beholder, but to me, the interesting/uninteresting factor is there. Same with more outdoor MBs. I think interest in scouting would jump with perdidochas's ideas in place. It boils down to what activities will keep the scouts challenged and active in the program, long term? Homework or outdoors? Outdoors always wins.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Thanks for the tips, CA Scouter, good stuff.

SR540Beaver, thanks for sharing that, well said.

Quazse, I see your point but I agree with Eagledad. If the SPL is a go-getter, he more than likely learned the ropes from an efficient prior SPL, as well as a solid adult leader. It's a rare scout that can be a great leader in the midst of crummy or absent adult leadership. PL and SPL leadership is a direct reflection of the adult leaderships' faith, backing and mentorship.

Most folks that aren't part of the BSA, or may not agree 100 percent with the BSA's stance on certain issues, still appreciate what the program is striving to achieve. I think the anti-BSA/anti-Eagle faction is a very small but vocal percentage of the population.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Leaders set the tone. And pace.

Maybe, the scouts aren't looking at it as cool/uncool. Perhaps they view it as "interesting/uninteresting." They may not understand the history of the BSA, or the Big Picture. They go to MB universities, and endure Cit in the Nation at the weekly meeting, because that's all they know scouting to be. They accept or reject it. For adults, the cool/uncool discussion is different. For example, as a guy who moves alot, and serves as a UC at each location, Stosh's observations match mine quite a bit. I see alot of meetings where scouts either wander around aimlessly, or things are structured around something like Cit in the Nation. Having been in outdoor-oriented troops in the past, as a scout and scouter, it's quite easy for me to label such meetings as uncool. In my mind, the meetings are for getting ready for the next outdoor adventure...gear prep, training, planning. Official BSA Homework MBs are something you do on your own time, on a cold winter's evening, as you press towards Eagle. You don't bore scouts to death with that at a meeting. The scouts will enthusiastically wear uniforms they find acceptable, show up willinging to meetings they find interesting, and read books that they get something out of. Too often, the BSA is structured around what a staffer thinks is cool. Usually, there is a huge gulf between what a staffer and a scout thinks is cool. Example: the historic MBs. I think those MBs were popular, and earned long after the expiration date, for reasons beyond their collectability and novelty. Rather, scouts may actually be interested in the topics. So the historic MBs are gone and what is on the horizon? Sustainability MB? Good grief. Uniforms...send some senior scouts to a big sporting goods store, and ask them to assemble an official uniform with what they find on the racks. I think the BSA would be greatly surprised, in a good way, with the functional, affordable, desirable clothing they select. Nope. A committee of staffers designs a uniform that is made just for the BSA, and generally disliked by many. We shouldn't bow to fads and whims. Those come and go. The best selling points of scouting have stood the test of time. If we use those as touchstones, we can't go wrong.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

JM, thanks. You raise excellent points--staying in shape and competency. Both are important for credibility. I'm also active duty AF, approaching retirement, and I think your points apply to the military as well as scouting. The "seasoned" guy/gal who can keep pace with the young folks gains alot of points in their eyes. Indeed, it takes alot of effort to keep fit and competent as the years fly by...but it's worth the time and energy. Professional image, respect (self and from others), and long term mental and physical health are the pay offs.

SoCal, my deepest condolences....

We can't overlook the image of the adult scouter. It plays a big factor too. Like Basement, I am having trouble drafting a PC idea on this. So I'll just plow in, broad brush: Many adults in scouting don't convey the image of "you want to be like me" to the kids. Quite the opposite. Yes, they are well-meaning folks, we couldn't get by without them, etc. True. But the fact remains. It's probably a factor is why kids flock to JR ROTC, football, etc.

I know we are talking about dollars, but the scouts' enthusiasm for the program is a big factor as well. Scouting is easy to crowd out of the line up if the scout isn't enjoying it. Go to football practice or plod thru Citizenship in the World MB at the scout hut on Tuesday night? Not a hard choice, really. Looking back, I kept active in scouting thru high school because my troop in AK was heavy into the outdoors. Meetings were just prep time for our next outting. We spent a minimum of one weekend a month in the woods, regardless of the weather. I moved heaven/earth to keep active in scouting, in addition to my other activities outside of scouting. So I think parents are being pragmatic. Spend 500 bucks on something the kid really wants to do, or 100 on something they don't really give a hoot about. PS That said, a scout unit that has a dynamic outdoor program is a bargain compared to those other activities. Then it's a matter of kids gravitating to the stuff they really want to do given there are only so many hours in the day. On the other hand, a sedentary unit is going to lose out every time, regardless of how low the financial cost may be.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Brew, I don't think there is a process that a vol or a pro goes thru so that they work against the heritage of the BSA. I think it's a matter of temperment. Why so many people would want to be part of a historically outdoor-oriented organization, and yet look down or seek to minimize the best selling points of the BSA, is beyond me. But they do it anyway. And it impacts the organization as a whole. What is scouting without adventure?

BadenP, depending on your location, you can still request medics from the local AF base. As an AF guy serving as a UC for the units on my previous base, I requested medical support from the local AFB clinic to serve at district cub day camp. Two nurses and four medics. The commander okay'd it, and day camp was their duty location on the days they served. They got a real kick out of the day camp experience, and will probably serve again. Just depends on commanders' willingness and local manning challenges. Many AF hospitals have been downsized to clinics, and the deployment rate for medics has been quite high the last 10 years. As you mentioned, the relationship between military and scouting has changed over the years, but there are still approved ways for the military to help scouting. As you know, the military folks get just as much out of the experience as the scouts. For the day camp medics, they hadn't been around cubs before and they came away quite impressed with scouting.

PS I concur with BadenP's comments, 100 percent.

Brew, all is not lost. The problem is BSA National is borrowing a play from Coca Cola...you've got a winning recipe and yet its shelved and "New Coke" is sold to consumers. Who hate it. BSA's winning recipe is outdoor adventure. Scouts have always thrived in the outdoors. Yet it is downplayed considerably. I agree with the previous posts, seems like National is bent to make a go of the failed "Improved Scouting Program" of 72 - 79. The young DEs of the '70s are now the senior BSA staffers of today. This will be their last chance to overcome the sting of failure that came from the ISP. But ISP didn't work in the '70s, and it won't work today, even repackaged and reheated as leftovers. No outdoors? No scouting. Without adventure, you've got a bunch of people sitting around on benches, talking and doing homework. And yes, cubs gluing macaroni to tin cans. Not inspiring. It was a dedicated cadre of old school scouters that got us thru the debacle of the '70s ISP. They kept the troops hiking and camping, even if camping MB wasn't required for Eagle, these leaders didn't let that happen on their watch.

Perdidochas, I'm tracking with you 100 percent. Re my computer/computer people comment--I'll expand a bit on my broad generalization. As computers have become the norm in military, business, the BSA, there is a tendency for staffers to adopt the notion "We [mankind] work for the computer"-- - "Well, I hear what you are saying but our system says X" - "Sorry, the system won't allow us to do Y...you [the human] will have to do/re-do these seven steps...." - "We would have updated that already by the system was down" - "The system is down so you'll just have to leave and come back." Etc. Office management has become slack because the ultimate computer--the trained human mind--has often been removed from the equation. (This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Good stuff, especially like BSA24's idea of an old-school Eagle medal. Made of sterling silver till '80 or so, the old medals can be picked up quite reasonably on ebay these days. Seems many come and go without a single bid. A cool and unique way to pass on scouting heritage.

Poor office management is a constant in BSA council offices. Those grand ladies and gents of yesteryear, who typed and filed, had work ethic and organizational skills that are no longer found in the BSA. They knew where everything was at, and the background on any topic. Unsung heroes. Computers and people who operate computers don't even come close. Perhaps they should add an "office management" block to WB.