desertrat77

Adults, by far. To paint with a Very Large Brush, and to broaden the scope to beyond units.... - Hypercritical parents who refuse to lend a hand - Ego driven adult leaders ("their" troop/district/etc.) - Clique Creatures/The Old Guard--if you weren't part of the council when Uncle Marvin was camp director back in the day, and you weren't inducted into the Camp Leakeytent Royal Order of the Ferrocious Ferrets as a scout (further stipulation: first 99 inductees are The Best People--triple digit folks need not join the conversation), well then you are just don't know a thing about scouting, and anything you may have done in another council was just a bunch of baloney, and if you dare talk about it, you'll get awkward silences and incredulous stares (you deserve it, bubba!) - The Association of Woodbadge Worship - Lots of knots earned, but can't tie one - Long term scouters steeped in local intrigue, ancient feuds, etc. - Training cadres that stretch 2 hours of training into 1.5 days - The Professional Guild of Meeting Prolongers (esoteric questions, long diatribes on matters that only concern a few attendees, etc.) PS "The Outdoors is a Scary Place" Crowd (This message has been edited by desertrat77)

It all depends on leadership.... If you have the right adult and senior scout leadership, the new scout patrol is a great idea. If not, it's a recipe is trouble. The new scouts get neglected, or bullied.

To cut to the chase: 1. No. 2. No. Your beliefs and lifestyle are you own. But if you are looking for respect, or validation of your beliefs, or recognition, or momentum to change the BSA, you would have gotten alot more of all if you spoke your mind, and made a stand several years ago, and then hung up your scout uniform as a first class or star scout. Agree or disagree with your values, such a stand would have been honorable. Instead, you willingly continued to progress in an organization that promoted values contrary to your own, and you publicly espoused these values though you ceased to believe them at a certain point. While your Eagle badge is now a handy spring board for your agenda, the foundation of your efforts to earn it are suspect. And folks will know it. Best wishes in your future endeavors.

Proud Eagle, I understand your point of view. As a youth in the '70s, I worked as a staffer for three summers at a camp in AK--it too had very limited resources. (Interesting because the rest of the state was booming because of oil, but those dollars hadn't flowed to the BSA). Pay was low (twenty five dollars a week starting pay, increased by ten dollars a week for each year you were hired back) and we received room (WWII pyramid tent) and board (good fare). The key was recruiting. The staff was small and it was considered an honor to serve. I think most of the staffers would have served for room and board only if need be. The experiences and memories of those summers are powerful to this day. I think it's great to pay staffers well if the council can afford it. Not all can do that. Then it becomes a matter of service, and there are seasoned scouts willing to do that. True, the challenge comes to pay qualified adults for specialized positions. At our camp, active duty soldiers were detailed to camp for two weeks at a time to run the rifle range. One of the DEs closed up his office in town and ran the waterfront. The camp director was a school teacher who was paid to run the camp during the summer. Perhaps those were simpler times but it worked well.

Brent is spot on...wait till summer...a few years ago, I picked up two jac shirts during the summertime for a fraction of what they would have been in cooler weather. I wear a 46 or 48 size coat, depending on the cut. First jac shirt is marked 46 long, and fits comfortably over my scout uniform. Second was like Brent's, marked 553, and is a 50 long. Very roomy, and the coat looks darn near brand new. In addition to scouting events, I'll wear one now and again to the store, or to walk the dogs. Both very warm, well sewn, tough as nails.

IM Kathy is right. Professional, scout-like behavior transcends gender. The BSA scout oath and law can be followed by males and females.

For occasional use, in weather not extreme, just about any tent will do. Camping regular? Worth the time and money to get a good one. Lots of good advice in the previous posts. My tent? Canvas BSA Miner's tent, circa '60s. No floor, one pole, a few stakes. Put a cheap tarp down for a ground cloth. Now that's camping! PS Holds up well in all weather--just gotta arrange that ground cloth right.

Eagle92, thanks for the clarity! As a unit level leader in the '80s, I'd see troops at camporees and summer camp with only 1 adult--not frequently, but often enough. Glad that's in the past. As a scout in the '70s, one troop I was in always had just 1 adult, the SM. A kindly gent, but did nothing to reign in his son, who was the PL of the new scouts (of which I was one) and quite a bully and just a donkey in general. We endured this PL's nonsense but looking back, it sure would have been nice to have another adult to keep things in check. Two deep leadership won't solve every leadership ill, but it's a great step in the right direction.

Moosetracker, I saw the same documentary, and I was too profoundly appalled at what happened. Unbelievable long-term failure of adult leadership--scouting, civic, and parental. Interesting side note re two deep leadership: at a council I served at a couple years ago, I saw an old black/white photo of from the '50s--showed some commissioners or executives standing next to an blackboard that tracked alot of the data we study today, including a column entitled "two deep leadership"--looked like it tracked the percent of troops meeting that standard. Like many things, having a standard and enforcing it are two different things. Or they were seeking to have two adults registered, not sure. Either way, two deep leadership wasn't really enforced until the early '90s, if memory serves. I thinks it's one of the best initiatives National has pushed. As for the subject at hand, I'm sure there is a method to revoke Eagle, but hardly worth the trouble unless there are extreme circumstances like murder and the like. Yes, I'm well aware of the tarnish that wayward Eagles bring, but like any part of society, Eagles run the gamut from good to bad. Their actions throughout life show whether they really embraced the scout oath and law. And where would the line be for revocation? Bounced checks? Dead beat dad? Bar brawl? Imprisonment? All good questions. And then the resources needed to review, process, defend, etc., a revocation request would probably be substantial. Suffice to say, at one time in life, before their misbehavior or crime or both, the Eagle met the standards and National okayed it. A moment in history. Living up to the ideal is a lifetime commitment.

Most RTs are boring indeed. The RT staffers mean well. But here's the blind spot: usually, RT staffers like meetings. There are folks that don't mind repetitive gatherings, with lots of announcements and such. Problem is, most folks don't feel the same way. And they are the ones you've got to convince to get in their car after a long day of work, say goodbye to their family for the evening, and come spend the evening at the scout center. The previous suggestions are great--mix it up, throw the traditional meeting format out the window, have a panel of seasoned unit level scouters as keynote speakers for Q and A, cook some food, don't sing "The Grand Olde Duke of York" or otherwise treat the attendees like cub scouts. Kept the agenda short and meaningful, and treat the unit level scouters with respect. We serve them. I think that's the most important thing.

More outdoors stuff overall. One year Webelo program, all geared towards joining boy scouts. Two years in Webelos? That's way too long.

Yes, the Opinel knives are superb! And very reasonably priced.

Kamelian, I'm with you! Low quality shirts, high cost, made in China--to uniform an organization that stresses citizenship and character to young folks--not one of BSA's finer moments. The only thing I can suggest is to watch Ebay--you can pick up some American made shirts at a fair price. As you know, no scout uniform is ever considered obsolete provided it's still servicable. Beavah, excellent thoughts on the bankers and industry.

Folks have no problem wearing uniforms as long as they are proud of the organization they belong to, the uniform looks good, and is reasonably priced.

Twocubdad, I too think that formal retesting would be a burden in many ways. However, if I had my druthers, I would prefer scoutcraft to be a) given more priority and respect and b) taught from the standpoint of it being a necessary part of being a scout now and in the future, whether the scout be first class rank or Eagle. Sometimes I see scout skills taught as "demo one time and done." I don't think this serves scouting or the scout or the public's perception of the BSA well. Though I had some rocky roads as a scout (difficulty learning some skills, bully leaders poorly teaching same), I benefited from the example of some superb senior scouts and adult scouters who, without bureaucracy or beating me over the head, showed they could still shine in any skill set a scout could demonstrate. Their competency and confidence really made an impact, and I did my best to learn those scout skills as a permanent thing, to attempt to follow in their footsteps. Scouting credentials, if you will. As for the old-old-old school skills? Gosh, I admit to liking those things--morse code and the like. Wouldn't hurt to give scouts some experience with morse code, if only for historic perspective. I think the throw-back MBs are a good thing, would like to see more.

Twocubdad, I hear what you are saying. In my experience, I believe bsic scoutcraft skills to be an important link to scouting's past and present. Working at unit level in the past, and even now as a UC, scouts seem to take notice when an adult can demonstrate those old school skills. Helps them relate, and perhaps motivate as well. Daily use? As a career military guy, I can definitely say those scout skills have helped me, especially on deployments. (No, not a ranger--but being able to work and live in austere settings is important, regardless of service or speciality.) And off duty, I use alot of what I learned in scouting, including stuff from the "homework merit badges." My knock against the latter? Redundant--at least for me. Learned these things in school. Citizenship series? Torture (even 30something years later!). And I like civics and international studies! In a scout setting? A bore and a distraction from the outdoors. All three of those MBs should be combined into one. I'd sum up this way. Though a bit of a stretch, let's look at an imaginary policeman that isn't good at marksmanship. Doesn't like guns. Barely passed marksmanship at the academy. But wants to be a cop and serve. Since marksmanship is one of his core skills, shouldn't we expect him to requalify regularly? And just as important, why is he a cop in the first place if he doesn't like guns? If he wants to serve, aren't there other jobs he can pursue that doesn't require firing a weapon? To finish my little screed, I think we can take one point and use it for the BSA: if it isn't about adventure, then why bother? If we are looking for programs to build character, or play soccer, or teach someone how to build a budget, these already exist and do a pretty good job. What does the BSA have that many others don't? Outdoor adventure. So if someone doesn't like the outdoors, and doesn't feel comfortable there, and isn't interested in passing along adventure to the next generation, what's the point? Again, I fully realize my cop/BSA example is mostly poor. But if not adventure, then what are we doing?

While I wouldn't recommend retesting the "homework MBs" (the citizenship series, etc.), there is benefit in remembering scoutcraft skills, in terms of credibility and reinforcing their value.

A great American has passed. His impact will be lasting. Band of Brothers is widely watched, and respected, crossing over to all ages and branchs of service. My deepest respect. When taps sounds at 2200 tonight, I'll step outside and salute.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

All great suggestions. For value and quality, can't go wrong with the swiss army tinker, as mentioned above.

Brent, I think the words I'll summon are encouragement (to serve in positions that translate only remotely to tangible service to unit level scouting) and disconnect (between district/council and units, between indoor and outdoor focus). Even at unit level, like minded adults will recruit same. Adventure minded will recruit people who like outdoors, and indoors folks will recruit indoors folks. Silver beaver and DAM? Fine awards.

Scoutfish, the uniform isn't the problem. But it sure can be a symptom if the focus is on the next doodad and not the welfare of unit level scouting. Brent, let me broaden my word from "reward" to "encourage" which could include rewards. It's possible to spend lots of time doing things, and attending meetings, and training, and chasing knots and awards, with folks at district and council level. Easy to get caught up in the administration and intrigues of those levels. Unit level scouting? Oh that, yes. Often a huge divide between unit level and above.

Eagle, I understand there are some thinly staffed districts out there. I was painting with a broad brush, admittedly, but I move around alot and see the the opposite of "thin" as well. Brent, no wadding here, and no particular knot is going to make or break anything. My point is the emphasis on adult matters, adult staff positions and awards does make a difference, and attracts adults that may not give a flying leap about the adventure. My observation concerns the number of adults I see a) not working at troop level and b) wearing uniforms festoooned with doodads (and just not knots). Is there a connection? I think so. National rewards well those who don't go outdoors and don't work with youth. The TC listing you present is interesting. First, many of those duties were filled by non-uniformed volunteers back in the day, if they were filled at all. And I truly believe that if there is a non-outdoor minded person in the training, or any of those positions, they dwill influence the flavor of the program, and the youth and adults recruited. Should they all go on the troop campout? No. But how cool would it be if they were able, willing, and properly trained to fill in as needed? District and council staffs--as Beavah astutely said, sometimes this is where the old timers go to serve. I have no problem with that--these folks have invested years in scouting and are a huge resource to the rest of us. But they are few in number. And getting fewer each year. Focus makes a difference. Even if one isn't camping every weekend, the movement reflects the spirit of those that lead it, from national to troop. And if I had to summarize today's spirit, I'd call it stagnant, and sedentary.

Brent, Eagle, we need district scouters, true. But we don't need as many as we think we do. And we need them to be more focused on pack/troop/crew/ship success, rathering than perpetuating the administration of district matters. I feel the same way about council and national scouters too. And while they may not camp as much as a unit lever scouter, they should still convey a spirit of adventure through their attitude and the programming they promote.

Posuhwed, I'm with you. To better summarize my screed about the correlation, I'd say it this way: BSA amply rewards administrative activity--attending meetings and training, conducting same, etc. Hence profuse adult uniform bling, and indoor-focused adults being attracted to the program. Shift the National focus to the outdoors, with more rewards to adults who lead and organize rugged outdoor activity, and that's when the BSA revives. Outdoor-minded men and women join, kids are excited and recruit. Reward adventure.

In my studies, I came away with the impression that cub program was created to occupy the many young boys who were chomping at the bit to join boy scouts, but weren't old enough to do so. So cubbing gave them some age-appropriate activities and prepped them for the boy scout adventure on the horizon. This outlook matches my cub days in the early '70s. From bobcat to arrow of light, the program was short and sweet, particularly Webelos. Webs was 1 year long, run superbly, and focused on all of us being ready to be boy scouts just as soon as we were eligible. We were treated like big boys and we loved it. Cubbing then turned into an apron-strings program, arts/crafts, sedentary, too long, too focused inward, and an end to itself rather than a launching program to boy scouts. Recent improvements have been made, which are good. But 2 years in Webelos? I can't imagine why that's necessary, unless it was empire building effort on the part of the cubbing community, from National downward. Regardless, "adventure" is the missing piece in boy scouting. Once we started downplaying adventure in the '70s, what was the hurry to leave cubs and join a scout troop? You're still going to lots of meetings in the church basement, and listening to people talk--you are just wearing a different uniform.