desertrat77

The SPL did the right thing, kudos to him. I'd support him 100 percent. Scouts may "need" a position, a promotion, a badge, etc., but they gotta learn they "earn" those things. They aren't supposed to be given. Key words that jumped out: attitude, behavior, bullying issues. They were not only the wrong scouts for the positions, but they especially need to learn the word "no." They hadn't earned the right to wear those librarian or QM patches, humble but important as those positions might be.

Beavah, you speak the truth. Still, given the collective image of the BSA today, particularly the adult scouters, Mike or someone like Mike would be a positive step in the right direction.

Seattle, I think Beavah said it best, but can't resist adding a couple thoughts. There are reasons why young folks aren't taking on leadership roles in the BSA-- - Good Olde Boys drive new people away - BSA training and leadership emphasizes dull meetings and administrivia over outdoor adventure (or any exciting or dynamic event) - Generally speaking, many youth may not be ready for leadership roles Whose was going to better prepared for an adult leadership role--the scout sitting on a bench in a Saturday MB university, or the PL taking his patrol on a hike?

Bart, I see your point, but I think the website is more focused on advertising and sales that prescribing uniform combos.

The original ideals of scouting are just as solid now as they were 100 years ago. However, the BSA's best draw--outdoor adventure--has been downplayed, and the BSA as an organization has become top-heavy and hidebound. The heart of scouting is the den, troop, crew, ship. Everything else is overhead. Scouting would survive, and thrive, if the BSA closes shop.

Mike Rowe would be a great Chief Scout, or whatever job's he's given at Irving. However, a few months back, in another thread, Calico made an interesting case for why Mike won't get the job--namely, bias because he's single, no kids, etc. Calico stated it more eloquently than that. I think that bias could be overcome, but Calico makes a good point nonetheless Though Mike would be great for the BSA, my personal take is he won't get hired. He's too outdoor-oriented, too fit, too popular, too outgoing, and a natural leader.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

"Birds of a feather...." While units can decide how much or little they are outdoors, the plain fact is National sets the tone. This is true in any organization. Senior leadership sets the priorities and subordinate units follow. Status quo: outdoor involvement is up to the unit. But at many districts, and above, the attitude from BSA leaders--vols and execs--is that outdoor adventure is considered a quaint relic. Something to keep the boys occupied. Sell some over-priced equipment with the BSA logo on it to make a buck. Campfire smoke is annoying. And so are bugs. Etc. Awhile back, during one of our WB threads, Kudu posted a website that referred to White Stag leadership training, and how, in the '60s, this management style training became the basis for WB, and planted the seed that moved the BSA away from the outdoors to indoors (Kudu, not sure if I captured that right but hope I'm close). So I went to the website and browsed...seems to me that a) only one of them was an outdoorsman, and b) lots of airy-fairy discussions, Academic approach. Lots of time sitting in the mess hall, or around a picnic table, looking at an easel. I thought "Wow, Kudu is right on the money." I could now see how the BSA has come to this point. Years ago, the BSA began to move away from the outdoors. And has recruited a couple generations of leaders that feel the same way because the "pinnacle" of BSA adult training isn't based on the outdoors. "Birds of a feather"--folks that are comfortable in the board room, but not on the trail, will attract fellow vols and execs who are like-minded. Sure, true outdoors-minded men and women can thrive in a troop or crew. But it's oil/water above the troop level. So FScouter, yes, a troop can set their own outdoor agenda. But when that troop has a heavy bureaucracy of non-outdoor minded people above it, it's not going to get the support it needs. Nor is the BSA going to attract the kind of adult vols and execs it needs to encourage an outdoor program. The sedentary, play-it-safe, meeting/homework-oriented priorities of the BSA today is effecting the entire movement. We got a bit of a reprieve in the '70s, when there were enough old school scouters to get us thru the lame "Improved Scouting Program" that definitely strived to deemphasize the outdoors. In the '80s, GB Bill's new BSA handbook breathed fresh life into the movement. But in the late '80s, as a unit level leader, I could see the handwriting on the wall. Lots of non-outdoor people at the helm. At all levels. The troop is usually going it alone.

Moxie, solid stuff, thanks!

Basement, to get the ball rolling, I'll offer what won't fill the hall: - The Awesomeness and Mind-Expanding Nature of Woodbadge - FOS - Rechartering minutia - Discussions about obscure BSA red tape - What are we going to do about _____________? (endless handwringing, and subsequent pooh-poohing of any viable options, leaving the question quite unanswered 45 mins later) - Popcorn sales - Anything that one can read in 30 seconds on the district website, or emailed newsletter That's a start. Naturally, some of those subjects could be of value to unit scouters. But the failure to present them succintly, and respectfully, turns the RT into a boon for the scouter with nothing better to do, and an easy "I don't need to go" for the busy scouter who doesn't to hear the same stuff rehashed month after month. There are many responsibilities in life that one must fulfill, though "irksome" and "weighty." Boring RTs can be skipped by most with no residual guilt.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

OGE: Yes.

Backroads, LOL, either you are digging your hole deeper, or you are trolling us in the most sublime manner. If it's the former, I'm guessing you are new to the work force.

Backroads, sometimes there is nothing you can do other than keep your poise and be polite. But the others who have posted are spot on--council offices, universally, have a horrible reputation. Lousy office management is the common denominator. Council offices routinely lose correspondence, or fail to act upon it in a timely manner. Correspondence prepared at council--and national--is often low quality. So you've got a long history to deal with, even if you are right and the unit didn't turn the form in.

OGE said it best--wearing a beret take a special "something!" I was a scout back in the beret's glory days. Some scouts wore them like Special Forces, all squared away...others adopted The Poet Look...then there was the passive-aggressive I Hate Beret Style wherein the scout just plopped the beret, lumpy and mishapen, on his skull any old way. It was all a source of amusement, at times. I would not worry about functionality. Berets and garrison caps, in the field, are very nearly utterly useless. I recall using both, depending on the hat policy of whatever troop I was in, as a handy hot pot holder if nothing else was available to take the pot of beans off the camp fire. Campaign hats used to be functional, but aren't any more. No longer dusty, sweat stained, and shaped uniquely to the wearer's personal tastes, they are now formal wear. This trend started a couple decades ago, it seems to me. (This message has been edited by desertrat77)

As a guy who moves quite a bit, I think Basement's observations are spot on. Some districts do their best to have a good RT, but folks struggle to show up. Why? The hectic pace of life in America is one reason. Another is the meeting agenda. Despite good intentions, the RTs can get hijacked by a few old timers who want to chase the same tired rabbits over and over. Other districts I've been in, the RT stinks. For the very reasons that Basement mentioned. The worse reason is the Royal Order of Self Appointed Very Important District Olde Timers. Walk up, shake their hand, start a conversation...they are shocked and try everything they can to weasel away. Make a comment during the meeting and The Olde Timers frown, fidget in their chairs, and change the subject as if you never spoke. I keep show up and participating, regardless. Just pig-headed, I guess. But lots of other folks have better things to do with their time than be snubbed like that. Or listen to the same rabbits being chased, month after month, year after year. I guess to offer some kind of constructive opinion: mediocre/bad RTs are usually organized and run by people who don't have anything else to do, and they've got plenty of time to do it. If a RT was designed specifically for busy adults, that would be a good start. If RT organizers approached their task thinking "the folks that I want to attend are finishing a day's work, and still have balance family time and their scout unit responsibilities" and tailored their comments and agenda items in such a fashion, it might help raise attendance. But as long as The Very Important Scouters run the show? They've got all the time in the world. Their kids are either grown and gone, or they are fending for themselves as "scout orphans" while mom/dad attend yet another scout event as part of The In Crowd.

What makes a good DE? Equally comfortable in the board room and in the outdoors.

I miss the fabric that scout uniforms were made of (60s and earlier). As a scout in the '70s, I wasn't particularly impressed with the then-current "green pajama" uniforms, so I'd find older uniforms in thrift stores and wore them in the field. Tough, comfortable and well designed, the old ones. Kept the green pajamas for meetings only. Concur with Eagle92--second edition of the Field Book is superb. One of my favorite books, scout or non-scout. Got one for my birthday when I was a Webelo. Read it and re-read it many a time. Superb writing and content, it truly captured the spirit of scouting and adventure. Also concur with Eagle92's endorsement of the BSHB, 9th edition. Having reluctantly used the anemic/lame-o 8th edition "new scouting" BSHB thru Eagle, I was happy to see the 9th edition reflect the spirit of "old scouting" that I saw when I read older handbooks.

FScouter, if folks want to wear their knots, who's stopping them?

Check out the classic MB sashes on ebay...many of them have the scout's previous ranks, pins and other cool stuff sewn on the back, and at the top and bottom of the front. As BadenP mentioned, the sash becomes a record of the wearer's scouting trail. And a handy place to keep the stuff most important to the scout. Of course, one understands that if a scout is Star, he previously earned First Class, etc. That's not the point. The purpose of sewing the old ranks on the sash isn't to state the perfectly obvious. It's a handy place to keep treasured mementos. On my old sash, I've got my rank patches, Lifeguard BSA, PL and SPL. During my constant moving, the rest of my old stuff is in a footlocker. But that MB sash is always tucked in the truck, in a safe place. If the scouts want to display their old patches, let them. It brings no discredit on the BSA. It generates good memories and conversation. The insignia guide is just that--a guide.

From what little I could glean from mom's discourse, the scout probably deserves some recognition. A heroism medal? I don't think so. Some less than that. Once I waded through mom's petition, found it interesting how little detail she provided about the actual lifesaving effort. Whatever agenda mom may have, the council did themselves no favors by misplacing the nomination package, then misspelling the scout's name on the certificate. While we don't have the council's side of the story, I can easily see this happening. Having been in four councils in the last five years, poor administrative practices are unfortunately common. Things are late, misplaced and then prepared and presented in a sloppy manner. Correspondence/office management is a lost art.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

I agree with AnniePoo.

Eagle92, now that you mention it, you may recall the last page in the second edition of the Fieldbook...a photo of Schiff--majestic building, deep forest--and a well reasoned pitch to the reader to become a scouting professional. (I'm going from memory, I'm overseas and no access to my library.) On of my treasured scout possessions is a Schiff training patch, given to me by a respected DE who went to Schiff for his prof training. He was in one of the last classes there. Great scouter, this DE, and he reminds me of the scouter you mentioned.

Priority on scoutcraft? Quality research, organization and presentation? National staff living up to the same standards? Holding people accountable--even the CSE? How times have changed in the BSA...and not for the better. Small wonder that GB Bill is persona non grata at the National Scouting Museum: http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=319601&p=1

Basement, I think the examples of you and your wife are fine, normal expressions, and completely appropriate. On the other hand, Mr and Ms PDA need a reality check, and we don't need a checklist or a rule to do it. I'm in the military...and when I see a couple in uniform doin' the PDA thing, I simply walk up and quietly say "Excuse me, but the jr high prom is over...you are professionals, in uniform, let's conduct ourselves in an appropriate manner." Works like a charm. They know instantly they shouldn't have been doing that. To quote the old first sergeant "What you tolerate will happen."(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Debate or a five minute speech from each on why they deserve a scouts' vote, both would work. As mentioned above, comm skills and citizenship, can't go wrong. HS debate teams teach strong but civil tactics. Our scouts should not have any trouble learning the principles.

All good advice.... Start out with small trips for the young scouts, then more challenging for the older scouts. When I was an older scout in Alaska, our SM would schedule a difficult trip, in the mountains, above the tree line, (snow shoes,crampons) during the Christmas school break for the older scouts who had the training and stamina for such a venture. I did a 50 miler in the Grand Canyon at 13, and Philmont at 14. But starting out as 11 and 12? Short overnight backpacking trips were very challenging to me. Gave me a chance to work up to something tougher.