desertrat77

Now that resqman mentions it, I have often wondered at my lack of desire to attend a jamboree, both as a scout and scouter. If I was going to attend a jambo as a scout, it would have been the one in '77. Made no plans to attend as our troop was going to Philmont that same timeframe. The morning we finished our trek and were within a mile or so of arriving at tent city, we passed a solo scout who was day hiking up to the Tooth. We all stopped and talked a bit. He'd just left the '77 jambo and swung thru Philmont on the way home. Asked what he thought of jambo he casually said "Yeah, it was pretty cool...rained alot." So he told us of all the mud and tent issues and such. Some chow stories too. He didn't seem that impressed with the whole thing, kind of like a big camping trip. Nothing against jambos--I wish the event and the scouts and scouters the very best. But my personal wish is to go back to Philmont for another trek. The jambo just isn't on my radar. However, I am truly interested to hear from the jambo fans on what they think of the matter. Jambo is a big part of our heritage.

All great inputs. I also try to have a stock of items at the end of the trail (car, camp, house) that might be needed (just in case). Extra water and food, gatorade, more first aid supplies, charged cell phone, dry clothes. Or an indulgence, like moon pies.

Old Ox Eagle, very well said.

There is a standard boy scout hike template...it's basically the same since 1910. Check any old scout manual or field book. Plenty of opportunity for fun and exploring, but there are basic principles of hiking preparedness, skill and safety that must be followed. The hike in question deviated from the standard from the get-go, by not having the right skills and clothes and plan. And continued from there. Dependence on electons is foolhardy most days. Even more so in the outdoors.

On the positive side, I've seen lodges cooperate respectfully with the Native American community. Rather than misappropriate heritage, the OA can actually enhance and promote it with the blessing of the Native Americans in their area. Agreed, cartoonish/hollywood Native Americanism has no upside.

SR540Beaver, OA may not be afflicted by such negative things in your lodge. But as a military guy who moves alot, and having been associated with OA since the mid '70s, there is a trend and it ain't good. The inward focus, patch and sash mania, ego, etc.--that's what I see, and talking with other scouters, I'm not alone in my observations. Again, I move for a living and what I see isn't restricted to a particular lodge or even region. There are squared away lodges, yes. We can be thankful for those. But overall, I don't detect the overwhelming desire for folks to belong to OA. Not anywhere close to the levels of the past. What's the point? What does OA provide? The cheerful service is largely absent. Wouldn't be surprised to see OA fade away completely in the coming decades. (This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Breaney, your lodge is not alone. Many are struggling. I doubt if the SM OA membership is the primary issue. Frankly, OA has slipped in many way over the years in terms of prestige, relevance, and cheerful service. First was the change from the brotherhood of honor campers to a generic honor scout/scouter society. Second, cheerful service has been replaced with an inward focus on fun indoor conclaves/events, lodge flap worship, strutting around wearing a sash, and ego inflation in general. The key to fixing the OA can be found by reading any old OA manual. Cheerful service......

Calico, tricky terrain is one aspect of the story. In several ways, the guys were not prepared for the hike.

Also, check out the comments at the end of the article. The public expects scouts to be proficient in the outdoors. I share their expectation.

Aw shucks, outdoor skills aren't important...stupid old maps with those complicated folds, pesky compass with the needle wiggling every which way...as long as you learn leadership theory and management principles, and attend merit badge universities now again, that's what scouting is all about. Plus, if you received map/compass training for Second Class (briefed while sitting on a log, and a few practicals on the parade field) it's against BSA policy to "retest" you on skills you've already been signed off on...after all, we don't want to potentially embarrass anyone..... And the leader? Sure, he might have had the minimum training (don't know for sure), but if he'd gone to Woodbadge, a capstone, once in a lifetime, mountain top experience, he would have had the opportunity to hone his outdoor skills to the peak of perfection...oh, wait a minute, scratch that...wrong century, wrong course. (This message has been edited by desertrat77)

I concur with Lisabob, well said. I'm all for CE...but I'm against dull, uninspired, lengthy, repetitive, square-filling training. So are alot of volunteers. Why National can't comprehend this is beyond me.

Thanks for the background, Eagle92. Homegrown/lowest bidder/promote-from-within IT usually results in user pain and extra work for everyone. In the end, it's no bargain. Glad to hear National hired someone from outside.

Ownthenight, 18 ASMs for a troop that size--sounds about right! Thanks for sharing your troop's ASM plan, I just learned a few things.

National presented Bill Gates with the Silver Buffalo a couple years ago. Why doesn't someone at National ask Bill to do a good turn and help with the BSA's horrible IT?(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Thanks for the additional notes...one thing that jumped out: that old phrase about "everyone thought that someone would step up and then no one did" comes to mind if the ASMs kinda mill around and don't have specific responsibilities. Must admit the ASM-assigned-to-a-patrol idea is still new to me. As a scout and troop level leader, I was taught that the SPL/ASPLs were the go-to guys for the PLs to guide, correct, instructor, motivate, problem solve, plan, etc. PL interaction with adults was very rare. Made for some interesting situations (safe environment to fail) but the scouts really learned the ropes that way. May not be pertinent to the situation at hand, but just a thought.

Moosetracker, sorry to hear about your old troop. As a former ASM, I think it's a key role. How to keep things on track: - Recruit adults who want an active leadership role instead of being office holders and meeting attenders. - Give the ASMs meaningful duties and then give them the authority and leeway to fulfill - SM should build a leadership team with the ASMs...sends the signal to the scouts that the SM is the lead adult, but together all of the adults are on one page, and if SM is absent, ASMs X Y and Z are have filling his/her shoes. Not all ASMs are up for this...some will be more involved than others. To a certain extent, ASMs have the same responsibilities as a scout to be active and show scout spirit. If they don't? Drop them from the roster during recharter. Not worth the money. PS An unscientific observation (as a current UC)--in my neck of the woods, we are having a heck of a time getting adults to volunteer to do anything. Even the registered leaders. Good folks but in the last year there have been more unanswered emails, cancelled events, poor attendance, missed opportunities, than I can remember previously. Sure, good things are still happening. However, leaders and parents just seemed burned out every time I see them. I'm in the military, and work with scout units on a military installation, so there are circumstances. Off duty military events (picnics, races, etc.) are poorly attended or cancelled outright too. Sign of the times?(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

As a UC for two units that fall under this type of home-grown CO, I'm not in favor of the concept. First, they provide even less support than the traditional CO. Sign some papers and accept the charter. Unit level leaders do everything else. Second, there is a potential conflict of interest if the CO has to intervene in a unit issue. Third, the appearance factor is not good. Just a fake umbrella to charter the troop. A missed opportunity to work with the VFW, or Lions, etc., for community goodwill. I'm working to find "real" COs for my units. Frankly, it's tougher than I thought to find potential/willing COs, so I have some understanding as to how these things come about.

Sign of the times when you hear arguments against long term competence and skills retention. Particularly ironic given the vaunted status of the Eagle award these days.

The board can and should ask tough questions to see if the candidate really accomplished his MBs, etc., or if he strolled thru the program and got things pencil whipped by mom/dad/SM/Uncle Joe. The board isn't going to revoke the badges. Or ask him to tie a sheepshank. But they can find out thru general questioning if the candidate did things fair and square. Eagle92's example is spot on. As mentioned previously by others, if the board is supposed to be a mere formality chaired by a guy in a purple dinosaur suit, with a bunch of puff ball questions, or to just see if he did his project (he has his workbook to prove that), then skip the board altogether. Or do it by skype. Or text. Okay, I'm being a smart alec, but my point is you don't have to question him on Dog Care MB requirement 6a(4)(a) to see if he really did it. The board can pick up on a committed effort, or a pencil whip. This may not ultimately affect the board outcome, but it will sure make the scout think for a long time after the board is over. I know I still think about the tough questioning I got from my board over 30 years ago. Because there was alot of wisdom behind their questioning, and it showed me what they expect of an Eagle. I passed but I was exhausted afterwards. I've got alot of respect for those gents, wish I could let them know that.

Scoutfish: Darn. Now all I can think about is seafood.

Wow! The style and line of questioning reminds me of my Eagle board in '77...uncanny! EBORs do not always include a bunch of softballs lobbed in a perfect arc over home plate. The scout was prepared--kudos to him, his parents and troop leadership! Be it questions or board member attire, the candidate should be ready for anything--and to the credit of the vast majority of candidates, they conduct themselves admirably, whether the board is a friendly one or not. Sounds like this board wanted to put the scout thru the paces. Yes, it makes for a challenging evening for scout and scouter alike. But the new Eagle will value passing such a board all the more. The board is looking for poise (grace under fire), the ability to articulate thoughts, and honesty. I concur with Moosetracker's thoughts...well said.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Very sad news...I'm sorry to hear this.

If a Eagle candidate is going to be tripped up by board member attire, then maybe he isn't ready. Bottom line, it's not a big deal. Most candidates have gone down more challenging roads in life than the board of review. I don't think we give our youth enough credit for maturity and resilience.

The article is superb, thanks Skeptic. I love those old handbooks as well. The article described why far better than I could say. Concur with Narraticong--the scouts are ready for adventure, and principles to believe in. Too bad many scouters in key positions aren't.

Movie on a campout = lame. Plenty to do in the outdoors without resorting to the laziest, unimaginative time-filling programming technique in the world..."show a movie." The cubs no doubt had already seen the movie a dozen times anyhow. PS Trainerlady: I concur with you--in your situation, a movie is appropriate.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)