dluders

1. Our year-old Venturing Crew is having a change of adult leadership for Rechartering 2009. Our previous Committee Chair was a female parent who also acted as a FEMALE ADVISOR. She believes that it is a REQUIREMENT to have COED ADULT LEADERSHIP present at ALL coed Venturing Crew activities (meetings, daytime outings, as well as overnight campouts). I believe that since there is no official BSA Female Advisor position per se, the need for a female adult leader is really only for OVERNIGHT campouts. There ALREADY IS Two-Deep Leadership present (albeit, male leadership) at crew events. I checked the Guide to Safe Scouting, and there was no statement REQUIRING coed adult leadership at ALL crew events.

2. She maintains that, if the Crew is coed, a Female Advisor must be present for all Crew activities if the young Ladies in the Crew are present. Male Crew Advisors are never to be solely in charge without the female counterpart; it is for the male leader's protection as well as the young ladies. She said this was matter was covered on our Venturing Leader training.

3. I'm wondering whether we need to find a female parent to serve as our Female Advisor for 2009. Which opinion is correct, and why? What is REQUIRED and what is simply a GOOD IDEA?

This weekend, I will fill out my council's record card (along with photocopies of ALL of my training records YET AGAIN), and personally hand-deliver the entire package to the council. What choice do I have? After all, the form letter everyone got basically BLACKMAILS folks into compliance:

"I am writing to remind you of the new training requirements for adult leaders in the XXXX Council....Effective December 31, 2008 [i.e., the Rechartering deadline], all unit "top leaders"...[and] 'direct contact leaders', including Assistant Scoutmasters, are required to be trained. Scoutmasters and Assistant Scoutmasters are required to complete all of the following courses to be trained for their position:

1. New Leaders Essentials

2. Scoutmaster and Asst. Scoutmaster Specific Training

3. Outdoor Leader Skills

...Our records indicate that you have not yet completed your training."

SO, no record of training in ScoutNet --> no rechartering as Scoutmaster or Ass't Scoutmaster.

I still haven't heard "Bob White" acknowledge the concept of BACKING UP data. The council doesn't have to "round file" my card or photocopies when they get them; KEEP THEM. They don't have to trust ScoutNet entirely yet again to keep the training data; make a SCREEN PRINT (Control-Print Screen) of the ScoutNet page and copy that screen print into Microsoft Word or PowerPoint. Doesn't BSA National BACK UP THEIR DATA? I don't see Scouts' merit badge dates, Eagle Scout records, etc. getting lost out of ScoutNet; only the ADULT LEADER TRAINING module apparently is faulty.

The U.S. Air Force (for which I've been working 26 years) has more personnel than the BSA, and they're deployed all over the world. USAF active-duty personnel move all the time, yet we don't have a problem with lost training records. We've had faulty, USAF-unique data management programs come and go, and THEY GOT FIXED or REPLACED with something better.

In the 21st Century, why can't the BSA employ standard computer database management techniques? BACK UP THE DATA.

I thank everyone (except "Bob White") for their assistance in this matter.

"Bob White", I ALREADY TOLD YOU (via your two, unsolicited "Private Messages") WHY my troop lost membership. DON'T CHANGE THE SUBJECT. We're talking about COUNCIL RECORD KEEPING, not my troop.

I know the saying, "He who is without sin, cast the first stone." Well, any organization who loses the same records 5 times in 8 years (regardless of the reason) IS INCOMPETANT by any objective measure.

I'm a licensed Civil Engineer working for the US Air Force. Anybody who goofs up the SAME WAY in my profession/workplace gets people killed. There is little/no tolerance for incompetance. WE CAN DO BETTER than mediocrity.

If the people I know (not complete strangers on this forum) think I'm incompetant, then ATTACK ME ON IT. I am licensed through my state as a Professional Engineer (P.E.) to have COMPETANCE in my field (Civil Engineering). If I am found not to be COMPETANT in my field, then my license gets revoked and I'm without a job. "Welcome to the real world."

So, instead of poo-pooing the SAME, PITIFUL OPERATION OVER AND OVER, I'm not tolerating my council (or BSA National's) incompetance. If the danged ScoutNet program doesn't work, FIX IT. We have poor data management programs in the USAF too, and we ABANDONED THEM for something better. Sticking with the same, flawed program year after year shows a complete lack of COMMON SENSE.

1. Whether or not a council continues to use the (faulty) ScoutNet national database or not, BACK UP THE DATA with a locally-developed, Excel spreadsheet. How complicated could this be? If ScoutNet is unreliable, then (gee) maybe they should have a BACKUP. What a business concept!

2. The fact that I called my council's staff "incompetant" seems to rankle "Bob White". He apparently wants me to settle for mediocrity, and just resubmit the same paperwork for the 6th time without a peep. Well, "A Scout Is Trustworthy" to keep the records of the volunteers who make the program work. Although I DO keep my own records, I won't play their game anymore. The council is going to FIX their problem. I'm not holding my breath, because their track record stinks in this matter.

3. I'll be a good little boy, and won't bring it up at the Oct 30th council "Open House" (where concerns and grievances are supposed to be brought up). I'll see if the council REALLY fixes the problem this time around. When it comes time to recharter in December, we'll see if they say that I'm "ineligible" to recharter because I supposedly haven't been trained. These are the same folks who awarded me the Boy Scout Leaders Training Award and Scoutmaster's Key a year ago; they know that Outdoor Leadership Skills and Scoutmaster-specific training are PREREQUISITES for those awards.

4. I'm not putting up with Mickey-Mouse organizational skills -- BACK UP THE DATA just like all (solvent) businesses do.

I still believe it's a matter of competancy. The council "professionals" has known about the problem with the danged national BSA database program, but they stuck with it anyway. You know the old saying, "Three strikes and you're out"? Well, it took 5 strikes to get through to our council staff that "Gee, we have a problem here" and to FINALLY do something about it.

You take an Excel spreadsheet, populate the data, BACK IT UP on a cheap $15 thumb drive, and you're done. No more lost data, no more telling the same Scouters EVERY YEAR that their training records are lost and that they must retake the training yet again.

SO, what other councils are having the same problem? CHECK IT OUT. There's probably a lot more "data" being lost than merely the Adult Leader Training dates. How about "Privacy Act of 1974" stuff, background checks, etc.? I cringe at the thought....

Here is the entire, unedited text of the reply from our council's Program Director (who sent me the form letter, and to whom I complained yesterday):

"I very much appreciate you taking the time to express your frustration. For years our council, like almost all other councils in America, have utilized a national BSA database to track all training records. The data base I am referring to is great for a variety of useful applications. However, the component that deals with tracking training records has been very inconsistent over the years. Our support staff has done their job correctly, they have entered your training records, I just looked you up a few minutes ago. For some reason when we ran our reports to show untrained leaders you are still listed. I dont have any explanation for that. We have gotten in the habit of reviewing those reports before we send out mailings like the one you just received. With the volume of names however, it is inevitable that we will miss some of the errors.

"Enough explanation, Im sure that you are looking for a solution. Actually, before reading your email yesterday I was in a lengthy meeting. We spent quite a bit of time talking about the very issue I described above. We have made a decision as a council to abandon the use of the national data base for the tracking of training records. We are going to begin to utilize our own tracking system. One that is far less complex, yet much more focused on meeting our specific needs as a council when it comes to tracking training records. With the volume of data entry that will be required to make this transition, it may take a few weeks to get this done. You are probably thinking that this change is long overdue and that would be a valid point.

"I want you to know that we are committed to getting this right. It has never been our intent to badger our volunteers with letters about completing training that they have already completed. I apologize for sending the letter and not catching it as I was signing them.

"Feel free to call me or email me any time to discuss this further or if you need assistance with anything else.

"Thank you." [& signed with his first name]

SO, does any other council Scouter out there have problems with the SAME "national BSA database"? If so, maybe your council should discard it too.

Naw, I already wrote such a letter to the Scout Executive last time. It didn't do any good. This time, I'm going to raise the issue at the council's "Open House" on October 30th. I want to know how many other Scouters are getting jacked-around with similar form letters, and wasting their time re-taking the same course.

I want the council to FIND my training records. You know, the ones that I EARNED through MANY WEEKENDS away from my family. They're going to ACKNOWLEDGE their recurring, systemic problem and FIX IT once and for all.

Any small business who lost their records 5 times in 8 years would go bankrupt. It's time this council's lackadaisical recordkeeping be brought to light in front of the whole crowd at the Open House. Enough is enough.

1. A few days ago I received a form letter from my council's Program Director. It reminded me of the "new training requirements for adult leaders", and stated that "Our records currently indicate that as an Assistant Scoutmaster you have not yet completed the following course(s): New Leaders Essentials and Scoutmaster & Assistant Scoutmaster Specific Training." This letter marked the 5th time in 8 years that my council has "lost" my training records.

2. I already had provided my council with those (and other) training certificates, as recently as last autumn. Although I received the Boy Scout Leader Training Award and Scoutmaster's Key for being a Scoutmaster for 3-3/4 years, my council apparently lost those records too. I even graduated from Wood Badge in 2004, but (apparently) that achievement has been "lost" too.

3. There's some systemic problem, or gross incompetance, with record keeping in my council. They apparently don't do any backups of their computer records. I have mused that the Council Registrar should be fired.

4. Although I do have my training records, I'm refusing to resubmit them. Those Scouters who didn't keep their records apparently have to get retrained in order to recharter. Why waste Scouters' valuable time when the council's INCOMPETANCE keeps losing the same records, over and over?

5. If you were in my shoes, would you just resubmit the records for the 6th time, or would you hold the council responsible? After all, "A Scout Is Trustworthy" not to lose records or waste valuable time. Your thoughts?

Thanks for the replies so far. To summarize, it sounds like my son won't have to be dual-registered in a Boy Scout troop because (1) He's a Life Scout, (2) He's already served as a troop "Position of Responsibility" for 6 months as a Life Scout, and this is signed-off on his Boy Scout Handbook and Eagle Scout Application form, (3) He can have an Eagle Court of Honor wearing his Venturing "Class A" uniform (no merit badge sash).

Again (due to High School time pressures), my son won't be able to be truly "active" in two Scouting units simultaneously. Being a phantom member of a troop isn't fair to his patrol-mates anyway. IF he joins this new Venturing Crew, he'll spend all of his time and energy there.

My 15-year-old Life Scout son is CONSIDERING joining a new Venturing Crew soon (since his old troop is "folding"). He can join another nearby troop, or join the Venturing Crew and still work on his Eagle Scout (only 2 Eagle-required MBs and Eagle Project are left). Due to High School time pressures, he's doesn't really have the time to be truly "active" in two Scouting units simultaneously. He's already served in a troop-level leadership position for 6 months as a Life Scout.

I read through the BSA Venturing literature and the past year's posts on this forum, but still have these questions:

1) Does the Life Scout have to be "dual-registered" in a Boy Scout troop to earn merit badges?

2) Does he have to be a registered Boy Scout in order to wear his Merit Badge sash and old Boy Scout uniform at his Eagle Court of Honor?

3) Can one receive an Eagle Court of Honor via the Venturing Crew, and wear just the Venturing uniform at the ceremony (no merit badge sash, neckerchief, etc.)?

I'm the Scoutmaster of a 25-Scout troop, and only 3 of the 25 Scouts are going on today's overnight campout. School just "let out" yesterday, and apparently folks have other plans. Even my own 14-year-old Life Scout son can't go, since he's 2500 miles away on a big trip. Should I have cancelled this campout (due to a lack of participation), or should a troop hold its campouts no matter what? Right now, we're planning on going anyway with 3 Scouts and 3 Scouters (including myself). That's a pretty poor turnout, don't you think? The Scouts THEMSELVES voted for this campout location and date, yet they made other plans....

Last month, I cancelled our canoeing campout when there were only 5 Scouts and other Scouters going. I felt bad about it, but my son couldn't go then either.

Is the Scoutmaster really expected to go on EVERY campout, no matter whether his own son can go and no matter how low the attendance? What would YOU do?

I earned my Eagle Scout on 9/4/1973 from the Greenwich Council, (Greenwich, CT) and am currently a Scoutmaster in Spokane, WA.

Thanks for all of the additional replies. I'd like to answer some questions that some of the respondents had:

1) Since the Life Scout DID serve admirably as Chaplain's Aide for 6 months, he fulfilled his Position of Responsibility. I don't know if some Ass't Scoutmaster signed off on this in his Scout Handbook yet, but I can't deny his eligibility for Eagle Scout on these grounds.

2) The Scout DOES show "Scout Spirit," but since he only comes to 1/3 of the troop meetings (and no campouts) anymore, I was hoping for more "Scout Spirit." I agree with others that he should be mentoring the younger Scouts.

3) This Scouts' dad is our Troop Treasurer. Our Troop Committee is rather fragile right now. Our Troop Committee Chairman is new in 2007, our Chartered Organization Representative is invisible except for Rechartering time, and we haven't had a Unit Commissioner during the entire 3-1/3 years I've been Scoutmaster.

4) I'm still willing to meet with the Life Scout and his dad, but the outcome will be similar to one I had a year ago with another Life Scout who didn't attend any more campouts either. When I talked to that dad (the Troop Committee Chairman at the time, a former Unit Commissioner, and Wood Badge graduate) about his son's lack of attendance, he said that I as "COMPLETELY out of line."

5) I know our Troop Policy is basically illegal. It hasn't been enforced in the 3-1/3 years I've been Scoutmaster, but it's a vestige from the "Old Geezers" who used to run the troop years ago. We can (and probably should) scrap it.

Our troop's policy is:

"To be considered active in Troop xxx, a scout is expected to attend 50% of scheduled Troop meetings and activities during the Troops annual plan calendar. Participation in extra BSA functions will be favorably considered, and at the discretion of the Scoutmaster, may offset some missed Troop functions. Any scout not meeting these standards will be reviewed by the Scoutmaster and committee on a semi-annual basis for continuation in the troop. To be considered for a Troop Brownsea scholarship, a higher standard of participation is expected."

Obviously, this doesn't jive with BSA Policy (from what I'm hearing from other Scouters on this post). Believe it or not, this troop policy is actually watered-down from the policy I inherited from the previus "regime" 3-1/3 years ago. It used to be that 50% attendance at troop meetings and campouts was REQUIRED for advancement to Eagle Scout. Obviously, this was illegal and unenforcable.

Yes, the Life Scout in question has served in a Position of Responsibility (POR). He was our Troop Chaplain's Aide for 6 months, and he honestly did a great job.

The Scout is very active in Theater (12 hrs/week), and he spends 1 hour/week on voice lessons. Theater is his passion.

Yes, it would be nice for an Eagle Scout candidate to display leadership regularly on troop campouts. However, for busy Scouts that are athletes, actors, etc., this is difficult for them to do on a regular basis.

What bothers me is that this Scout was once a go-getter who was a "fast burner," then he completely shifted his efforts to other activities. I suppose that TECHNICALLY he has met the 6-month requirement for Eagle Scout by serving as the Chaplain's Aide.

No, I haven't yet had a Scoutmaster's Conference with him. His dad isn't the biggest fan of my leadership style, and I know that he would absolutely EXPLODE if I told him that his son was considered to be "inactive" per the Troop Policy. Now that I know (from this post) that our Troop Policy is basically illegal, I won't stop the Scout from pursuing his dream.

When this young Life Scout approached the Troop Committee about his Eagle Project a year ago, everyone raised their eyebrows. They KNEW that he might be too young to successfully "pull off" an Eagle Project, and we were right. He hasn't done much for a year. Now that he's more mature, he's giving it another shot.

Thanks to all for their inputs and guidance. I still would appreciate more comments if folks have time to type replies. Thanks.

Just to clarify the specific situation about this Life Scout:

a) He became a Life Scout at a Board of Review on Feb 8, 2005.

b) He has had the same Scoutmaster (me) for the past 3-1/3 years.

c) He was much more involved in troop campouts, meetings, & other activities before his last campout 1-1/2 years ago (in Oct 2005).

I have a nearly-15-year-old Life Scout in my troop who's working on his Eagle Project again after a 1-year delay. His last troop campout was over 1-1/2 years ago (in Oct 2005). He attends about 1/3 of the troop meetings, due to conflicts with other activities. As his Scoutmaster, should I consider him to be "active" for the purposes of rank advancement to Eagle Scout? Why or why not?

[NOTE: Our troop does have a policy in this regard, but I'd like to solicit the opinion of experienced Scouters nationwide when I'm asked to justify my answer to the Scouters in my troop.]

Back on topic:

"YES" or "NO" -- Does a district and/or council have the right to impose limits on Merit Badge Counseling? I read cover-to-cover the entire BSA "Advancement Committee Guide Policies & Procedures" manual #33088D (2006 printing), and I see no provisions for any local limits at all.

Yes, I suppose I could "drop" some of the various Merit Badges that I'm counselor for, to gain some more time for my Scoutmaster's duties. I hope that people don't expect the Scoutmaster to be a robot, teaching the same-ol' Tenderfoot-to-First-Class stuff year after year. What happened to having some FUN and CAREER-BROADENING with my own son, a Life Scout? Why can't I have the latitude to teach him as many Merit Badges as I feel like?

Like I said before, he wants me to teach him Aviation Merit Badge. Right now, I don't have "room" on my danged "quota" of 7-MBs-per-counselor. How many folks are there that teach that merit badge? Why should I have to arrange for another Scout to join my son (to comply with the MB "Buddy System" rule), drive them to some faraway house, and waste a whole bunch of unnecessary time when I can teach him the badge myself, at MY own convenience? CONVENIENCE is the primary reason that each unit has their own, in-house group of MB counselors.

I still don't think my council (or district) has a leg to stand on if they intend to enforce this policy. BSA Policy #33088 says "No Limits," period.

There are over 114 different Merit Badges. Do you think that BSA National really intended to LIMIT dedicated Scouters to just a few of these?

My Life Scout son has 22 Merit Badges already. I've only been counselor on 3 of those. I'm working on another one (Cycling MB) with him right now. I want the FLEXIBILITY to work with my own son anytime I feel like, on any subject that I'm qualified to teach. How dare somebody impose a limit on me, a licensed Professional Civil Engineer with a Master's Degree? I'm not going to be suckered into thinking that there's some bogus "limit," when there's NOT.

Yes, I agree with "Lisabob" that every Scouter wants to have their own set of MB counselors within their own unit. Why shouldn't they? They KNOW the parents, they want to help the Scouts in their own unit (i.e., the friends of their own sons), and they DON'T HAVE TO TRAVEL FAR. Due to the mandatory "buddy system" requirement (whereby at least 2 Scouts must meet with a non-relative MB Counselor), there are SCHEDULING problems when dealing with other units.

What better way to "schedule" a MB session than to chat about it at the weekly Troop Meetings or monthly campouts?

I bust my butt being Scoutmaster. I DID approach our Committee Chairman about "gaps" in Eagle-required MB offerings within our own troop, and got only one parent to step up (to teach Family Life MB). Apparently, the other parents don't have time. For the annual Merit Badge College, there AREN'T a lot of Scouters willing to devote their time to 4 ea. Saturday-morning sessions over 2 months' time. I wanted to help Life Scouts in my own unit earn Citizenship in the World MB, so I volunteered to teach them and 50 other Scouts in our district who needed the same badge.

This MB-limit problem is being pressed by our District Advancement Committee gentleman who sits on the various Eagle Boards of Review. In reviewing certain Scouts' Eagle Application and Eagle Project Book, he sees a "problem" whereby the Scout is earning merit badges at too young an age and from mostly the same folks.

The Scouters in attendance at our District Roundtable privately think that this is mainly a "problem" wihin the LDS Scouting units. They have their own youth program, whereby all young males MUST go through the Scouting program as a "rite of passage" of sorts. 21-year-olds are told that they MUST be MB counselors for the younger boys in their "stake" (church). Since the minimum age for being a MB counselor is 21, this is "legal" but these 21-year-olds don't have the same LIFE EXPERIENCES as an older parent.

The LDS units most definitely tend to have an "in-house" group of MB Counselors within their own "stake." The LDS Church provides a significant portion of funding for Council operations, and since our council leadership doesn't want to "pick on" just LDS MB counselors, they're imposing MB limits on everybody. That's what the non-LDS Scouters like me are thinking.

"John-in-KC," I really don't think you appreciate how time-consuming being Scoutmaster is. I typically have 3-4 Scouting events per week, every week. My "Scouting widow" wife gets miffed that I'm going to meetings all the time. Just today, I got a telephone call from the mother of a Scout in another troop who took my Citizenship in the World Merit Badge class, but needs to make up one more requirement. I'm supposed to chainsaw some fallen trees at the local Boy Scout Camp this Sunday. When am I supposed to relax and enjoy some free time with my own son?

At last night's District Roundtable, there was a 1/2-hour discussion amongst the Scouters about the new MB limits. The District Executive has agreed to have a survey e-mailed out to all Scouters, and to discuss the matter further at the Spring Camporee coming up in 2 weeks. That's progress. 1/3 of the Scouters last night didn't really think it was a big deal to have MB limits, 1/3 said limits were in violation of BSA Policy #33088, and 1/3 thought that the District Advancement Committe should be rejecting MB Counselor applications from pencil-whipping parents.

Our district has 288 MB counselors, according to our DE. The problem is not having too few counselors; it's that there are TOO MANY folks signing off on merit badges in an uncontrolled fashion. The District and Council haven't been checking who is registered to sign off on various badges.

To answer "lisabob"s questions, no, my troop doesn't have just a few parents teaching all of the various Merit Badges. I've mentioned all the ones I'm counselor for (E-Prep, Metal Work, Cooking, Cycling, Camping, Cit in World, Coin Collecting, & Space Expl.). Although I admit that I prefer just working with only the Scouts in my own troop, it's out of necessity since I'm SHORT OF FREE TIME as Scoutmaster. I'm leaving in 45 minutes for my 3rd-consecutive Scouting night this week.

The Merit Badge College classes on Coin Collecting & Citizenship in the World were open to all Scouts. I taught these even though my own son had already gotten these.

There isn't a shortage of Merit Badge Counselors in my District. In fact, there's quite a few. That's the crux of the problem here. The District Executive thinks that there's too many parents who are signing off on too many merit badges and not upholding the high standards of Scouting. We have home-schooled kids who have dozens of BSA Merit Badge pamphlets at home, and they get credit for what they learned. The LDS units have their own youth program.

I found out today that our District Executive has agreed to conduct a survey amongst all of the Scouters to come up with a more equitable solution to the problem. I'll find out more at tonight's District Roundtable.

Indirectly from a fellow Scouter, here's the nominal reason that our District Executive has placed the merit badge limits:

"Our district has too many parents signing blue cards for Scouts and not holding the values we have strongly. Due to this, the committee has approved some guidelines to help stop the problem in the District."

Well then, why doesn't the District Advancement Committee not approve the Merit Badge Counselor applications for these "pencil-whippers"? Why should talented Scouters who do a GOOD JOB in teaching their merit badges be penalized with these limits?

Let me explain my situation as Scoutmaster. Last summer, my troop attended a Boy Scout summer camp whereby a full 40% of the merit badges were "partial credit." It didn't matter that I had written letters in advance to prove that my Scouts had met certain prerequisites ahead of time -- the 17-year-old counselors just issued partial credit on their portion only. To this day, I have a baggie full of partial-credit merit badge "blue cards."

To alleviate this backlog, I signed up to be an E-Prep counselor (just to sign off on the prerequisite for First Aid MB), a Metal Work MB counselor (to sign off on the metal shop tour requirement), and for Cooking MB. In Feb-Mar 2007, I taught a four-weekend class for Citizenship in the World MB and Coin Collecting MB. Not everyone completed the requirements, so I'm saddled with partial-completions. As Scoutmaster, I'm the "Camping" MB counselor for my troop. I'm an Engineer, so I'm signed up to teach Engineering MB too. I have a serious High-Powered Rocketry hobby, so I enjoy Space Exploration MB.

My Life Scout son isn't a strong swimmer or hiker, so we've been working on the time-consuming Cycling MB. I'm his counselor for that. Just the other day, my son asks me whether he could work on Aviation MB (since I work at an Air Force Base). Am I supposed to tell him, "Gee son, I can't because my illegal quota of 7-MBs-per-Counselor has been used up"?

A week ago, there was a nationwide news story about a Boy Scout who had recently earned 121 different merit badges. This was lauded as being a "good thing." I knew an Eagle Scout (who was the older brother of my son's Cub Scout denmates) who earned 42 Merit Badges. He happened to be from an LDS family. If these two Scouts were in OUR district, they wouldn't have a prayer about reaching their full potential.

All these limits are going to do is STIFLE learning and STIFLE personal growth. I'm not playing this game, since it's flat-out in violation of BSA policy.

I found out today from my District Advancement Chair that these limits are COUNCIL POLICY, not just District policy. I still haven't heard one reason WHY these limits are in place.

I'm not going to agree with "Beavah" that I should just relax about this matter. Our new council policy is not in accordance with BSA policy as promulgated in ACP&P #33088.

There are Latter-Day Saints (Mormon) units in our area who DO have a greater heartburn with these limits than I do. I don't think that our Council or District Advancement folks want to address the perceived "Eagle Mill" reputation that certain LDS units have, so they're imposing these council-wide limits. They don't have the guts to address the problem up-front, so they impose council limits that are in complete violation of BSA policy.

"There are no limit." What part of the word "NO" don't they understand??? What other bogus, unfair limits will be imposed if we accept this?

I don't yet know WHY my Distric Executive (or the District Advancement Chair) has set these limits. I have my suspicions, but I will find out at tomorrow night's monthly Roundtable, when the DE and the Scout Executive will both be in attendance.

In the meantime, I bought a copy of the 2006 printing of the Advancement Committee Guide Policies and Procedures. On page 13, it indeed does say:

"There is no restriction or limit on the number of merit badges an individual may be approved to counsel for, but they must be approved by the committee for each specific merit badge." [Note that there is a mechanism for the District Advancement Committee to reign-in pencil-whipping MB counselors who are "too easy" -- they disapprove the pencil-whipper's merit badges counselor form.]

"There is no limit on the number of merit badges a youth may earn from one counselor." [This allows empty-nest older Scouters to teach different badges at our annual "Merit Badge College" to the same Scouts].

I am a Scoutmaster, and this issue doesn't affect my Life Scout son. However, it DOES affect some older Scouts were earned many of their merit badges from the same counselor 3 years ago (before I became Scoutmaster). The matter also affects a Wood Badge Scouter in another troop. So, I will fight this battle with my DE and ask him to rescind his letter. There have been some excellent points brought up in this forum, but the bottom line is that the ACP&P is pretty explicit -- NO LIMITS.

Although the DE's letter didn't have a "grandfather clause" that talked about previously-earned badges, on page 26 of the ACP&P it says "A merit badge cannot be taken away once it has been earned, provided the counselor is a registered counselor for the merit badge." It shouldn't be necessary to have to "appeal" this bogus limit when a Scout meets his Eagle Board of Review, and is turned down. It's extremely demoralizing to him. What happened to NATIONAL STANDARDS and UNIFORM requirements? Having one district have limits, and another district 10 miles away have no limits, smacks of unfairness. If individual Scouters are "pencil-whippers", then lean on them and let everyone else alone.

You know, this whole matter is UNENFORCEABLE in my council for these reasons:

a) My district handed back a huge baggie full of the "blue cards" a year ago to the Scoutmasters. The district had updated their database, and didn't want to store the blue cards anymore.

b) In her computer database, the Council Registrar does not record WHO the merit badge counselors were, so without PROOF there's no way that they would know whether the 5 MBs/Eagle limit was exceeded or not. Unless the Scout shows HIS blue card copies in his Eagle Book for his Eagle Board of Review, nobody would know the difference.

I thank all of the Scouters who have responded so far. It is most interesting that my district's edicts are in violation of the BSA Advancement Committee Policies & Procedures manual #33088D.

Since "Lisabob" did ask, here are the pros and cons of the 7-Merit-Badges-per-counselor rule:

PRO: Scouts can meet different Merit Badge counselors and develop their communications skills with unfamiliar people.

CONS:

1. Scouts already have to use the Buddy System to take classes from Merit Badge counselors. By limiting the number of different merit badges offered by Scouters in their unit (in their neighborhood), Scouts are forced to travel to other neighborhoods. This greatly inconveniences the two Scouts parents (who must drive the Scouts to/from the sessions). Parents already are short of time driving their children to/from sports, band, Scouts, etc.

2. Although there are ~114 different Merit Badges, Scouters will be reluctant to expand their Merit Badge offerings if theyre limited to just 7. Theyll tend to concentrate on the Eagle-required Merit Badges and perhaps the popular (easy) badges like Collections, Indian Lore, Pets, etc. How many Scouters whove done fiberglassing would sign up to teach the new Composite Materials Merit Badge?

3. Scouts in small units have only a few Scouters from whom to get advancements. Rural units are far away from most Merit Badge counselors in urban areas. Scouters in small units must often sign on to teach 7 or more Merit Badges to give their Scouts a fair chance of reaching their potential.

4. The 7-badge limit places an unfair disadvantage on Scouts in our district compared to other districts in the same council. There should be a UNIFORM, council-wide (or nationwide) policy to make rank advancement opportunities EQUAL regardless of location. If our district's policy is to be retained, then the other districts should follow the same policy to be fair to all.