This is How We Will Grow Scouting

[Sentinel947 1205]

 

Canoeing a river, swimming a lake, hiking a trail, cutting firewood, identifying plants, watching birds, building (and playing in) a fire, cooking your own breakfast in the woods...  Those are experiences that will grow Scouting.

 

I'd rather have half of BSA's current numbers doing the real program than the weenied down mess that we have devolved to.  I no longer expect to reach every boy; but I do like giving those boys who do come out the real woodcraft experience.

I'd say my Scouts get these experiences. I know yours do JoeBob. To be honest I don't worry about National. A CellarDweller once said that all Scouting was local. I 100% agree with him. 

[cyclops 55]

Yes, blw2, I suspect that buried in those many thousands of posts and countless tens of thousands of words are some genuine  good ideas.    So...have you read all 7000+ posts? Me neither. I did read about his admitted struggles. His words, not mine. The fact that other youth groups are doing well is evidence that he is not the source of the problem, that's true. But it isn't necessarily evidence that he has the solution either or else he might use what works for one group to overcome the struggles of the others. But he has not shared those words of wisdom with us here, not even after 7000+ posts and tens of thousands of words.

 

OK, to get with the new tangent about chaperoning middle school children, I went with the entire 8th grade class (about 80 students) on an overnight trip to an urban area and the ratio was two students per chaperone. And STILL someone managed to get their teeth knocked out. That kind of thing is just unavoidable to some extent. But three adults with 120 students...whoever is in charge is hostage to fate.

 

TwoCubDad, I agree with your approach. I have long understood that the more executives are paid, the more they work for the money and not the actual goals. And that big money as well tends to attract 'talent' whose interests are primarily the money. Worse, those who ARE in that kind of mode tend to value things in terms of dollars and things that cost more are worth more. Volunteers (who pay their way in many ways) are worth nothing to those executives...because volunteers are NOT paid.

 

But overall I'm of the opinion, like Sentinel 947, that if things are going well locally, that's really all that counts, or most of it. As for the solution to those who think they have a problem, I look in my mirror and have no clue as well. Things here are going well so I'm not even sure that BSA needs to grow at all. Why would we care? Why would we do the heavy lifting of growing an organization that is, as TwoCubDad astutely noted, is already top heavy with overpaid execs? I say let it wither some. Drive the percentage parasites out of the organization and then let it be what it ought to be.

 

As for woodcraft, BSA has no monopoly on that. If BSA went away tomorrow, my CO would still be able to run a youth program with all that stuff. No problem. Actually, it would be even cheaper to run, no uniforms, no overpriced stuff to buy (or sell, lol) and we'd still have all the equipment!

Edited October 13, 2015 by cyclops

[Stosh 3452]

One never sees the stupidity of the situation until someone points it out.

 

Venture Crew.....

 

Co-ed.....

 

BSA registered members......

 

High Adventure Trip......

 

50 people sign up, to go, numbers equally balanced male and female.....

 

Youngest age signed up for the trek is 18.....

 

BSA requires a make and female chaperon leaders to be present on the trip.

 

Does anyone else see the stupidity written all over this?

[ProScouter06 34]

Interesting thread. Some thoughts. @@Twocubdad when i first started working for the BSA I had the same question about the national dues. Especially since my work on the local level never really seemed to benefit from the national organization. However in time it became clear that the national service center markets our brand and sets the tone and mission of the BSA for all local scouting to be guided by. I've always been shocked at the animosity out there of scouters toward the national BSA. The same people that claim to love the movement are often its harshest critics.

 

That aside, I've always felt that if local councils could charge a membership fee scouting on the local level would be in a better place. The reason professionals are guided by numbers is because they have to be to keep scouting going, to keep the camps operating and to keep the lights on. The costs are tremendous.

 

Those that say the program benefits from a drop in membership make no sense to me. As earlier noted as the sky is falling aka membership you'd think people would want to see the movement growing. Growth of scouts means more kids benefiting from the program. How on earth could less kids benefit the movement? Some say that scouting has been watered down? IMO that comes down to the leaders. For example scouting in my hometown is still run the way it was when my dad was a scout. Sure some rule changes but the program is almost identical to the one he experienced. Keep running scouting the way it should and could be run and it really shouldn't be watered down.

 

Twocubdad noted that local councils should focus on the outdoors and become outfitters or a guide service in a way providing programs on the weekend and during the summer. I could not agree more that the idea is a great one and is already happening all over the country. When I read above from @@Krampus about the lack of people camping and the lack of qualified or trained volunteers it only makes sense to provide scouting in a variety of ways. It's true that the BSA is listening to its customers by offering some new programming like stem and new exploring opportunities. Of course there will be those that may be short sided and not see the need to change or really the need to just offer more.

 

It seems that most of the frustration volunteers feel toward professionals is from a lack of understanding of the employees jobs. The professionals I worked with, and I as well worked ridiculous hours sacrificing years to offer support and provide leadership and gufience to make scouting successful. There are some bad eggs like in every field of work that are there for the money but they are few and far between especially since the money is not that good unless you become an SE or CEO. Some of them make more than they should especially in a shrinking organization but that's another topic for discussion. At the end of the day both volunteers and professionals are really on the same team. It's much easier and more enjoyably for everyone when folks start to understand that.

 

This topic could probably be spun off into several others but nice to see so many different approaches and viewpoints.

[Stosh 3452]

And they shouldn't allow it. I wouldn't call it courage, I would call it foolishness and irresponsibility.

 

If one does not have properly trained adult leaders and properly trained youth leaders, I would totally agree with the statement as well, but the goal of a good youth program, especially one that says it develops leadership is to be successful with delivering on the promotion that it can develop the participants.  If the group is operating at a junior high level and never progresses beyond that, I would advise against it as well.

 

In the BSA one is assumed to be a mature adult once they reach the age of 21.  In the church, however, adulthood and full membership is assumed when the person is confirmed.  That falls around late junior high age.  I find it rather interesting that when treated like an adult, these people will begin acting like one at an earlier age than what most in our society would expect.  The reason they don't expect it is because, I suspect, they have never tried it.

[MattR 2659]

I agree with Stosh on this one. A scout learns what trustworthy really means when an adult can really trust him to do something that both of them knows is important. And that requires some risk. In fact a lot of scouting requires some risk. Kids fall down and stand up. This is a big part of learning trust and confidence. Confidence comes from knowing you can stand back up and try again. Some parents can accept that risk and some can't.  Let's not worry about those that don't like it.

 

The aims of scouting are character, citizenship, and fitness, and that's how boy scouts is sold. Maybe that needs to be updated to talk to parents in a language they understand. I think they'd rather hear that scouts will teach their son to be responsible and do the right thing without being asked. And one of the methods is letting their son fail in a controlled situation. Maybe if that was all updated then everyone would get focused on what scouting is really about.

[JoeBob 606]

 I've always been shocked at the animosity out there of scouters toward the national BSA. The same people that claim to love the movement are often its harshest critics.

 

Some say that scouting has been watered down? IMO that comes down to the leaders. 

 

I think you've stumbled upon a truism: most true outdoors-men are rugged individualists.  Their independent nature makes them less willing to put up with group silliness. The more BSA bans water guns and elevates stuffed critters in the 'Pinnacle of Scout Training', the fewer hard men stay around to set the example.

 

Soon you have a bunch of adult leaders who would rather hang in a cabin and watch the game instead of hang in a solo hammock between 2 trees and dare the bears to bite my butt.

 

Oh yeah, Philmont banned hammocks, too.

Edited October 13, 2015 by JoeBob

[Krampus 696]

When I read above from @@Krampus about the lack of people camping and the lack of qualified or trained volunteers it only makes sense to provide scouting in a variety of ways. It's true that the BSA is listening to its customers by offering some new programming like stem and new exploring opportunities. Of course there will be those that may be short sided and not see the need to change or really the need to just offer more.

 

 

But when you water down your core product, and have little uptake on your new product, everything suffers. BSA is trying to be too many things to too many people in a desperate attempt to stave off massive membership declines. This is not a prudent strategy in business or any other venture.

 

You sell a popular cereal. Sales drop. You make different cereal in an attempt to meet alternate demand. Sales for all are below your costs to produce, and compared with overall sales of your core product, you are still way down in sales. The answer is NOT to produce even more different types of cereal in an attempt to increase sales.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Krampus

[blw2 433]

This ties in with my comments a couple pages ago about council camps stepping up their local HA activities in support of troops which don't have the trained leadership to pull it off.  I wrote that council camps should look something like a guide service, especially in the off season, providing climbing, shooting, aquatics and other specialty activities to units which can pull them off on their own.......

Some time ago in a different thread I asked if anyone had taken a troop or patrol to one of the survival schools or guide services.

This is sort of like your guide service idea a bit,

except I'd rather steer the boys to go to a real one rather than a council camp..... if they were interested in that sort of thing

like a Bear Grylls or Matt Graham from TV....type thing....

 

I just picture the BSA camp experiences so far in cubs....  There is a lot of showing.... a lot of talking... and very little doing going on.

 

Here's a flint, this is how you use it, here's several ways of how to stack wood..... for 30 minutes or more.... class is over, hope you enjoyed it boys!  ....and in the end the boy thinks where's the fire?  we never started a fire!?!

 

like standing in line for up to a hour or so sitting through two or more various briefings by rangemaster..... an hour or more.... just to get a chance to shoot 5 arrows or maybe 4 minutes worth of very controlled and slow BB shooting.... maybe 20 shots if he's lucky.

 

I can't imagine a HA effort at a BSA camp being much different.

 

.....

OK, to get with the new tangent about chaperoning middle school children, I went with the entire 8th grade class (about 80 students) on an overnight trip to an urban area and the ratio was two students per chaperone. And STILL someone managed to get their teeth knocked out. That kind of thing is just unavoidable to some extent. But three adults with 120 students...whoever is in charge is hostage to fate.....

I think sometimes more can be too many.

with a 2:1 ratio and major injury!  The adults were standing around jaw boning with each other thinking someone else was watching, no doubt.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

I've always been shocked at the animosity out there of scouters toward the national BSA. The same people that claim to love the movement are often its harshest critics.

Well, as far as I can see, the "animosity" is not toward the "movement" nor is toward the "BSA", if you define "BSA" as the total sum of all of us, volunteers, professionals and youth members. When people criticize "National" or "National BSA" the criticism is really directed toward some of the rules, policies and actions coming out of the national headquarters. And I suppose, by extension, some of it is directed to the people making those decisions. I think a lot of people feel that the people in charge at Irving TX have lost their connection with Scouting as it is actually practiced on the local level, and some of the decisions reflect that. My particular criticism is that National seems unable to effectively communicate with us out here in the field. Others focus on other issues. I also think that the high salaries of the top people at National leave a bad taste in the mouths of many local Scouters.

 

And you, being a professional Scouter at the council level, are kind of stuck in the middle of all this. It is not an enviable position. But please don't equate the criticism of "National" that you see here with animosity toward the "movement." They are not the same thing.

[perdidochas 658]

So true!

 

I've often asked myself why the BSA isn't marketing it's best product--outdoor adventure.   I've finally come to the sad conclusion that the BSA is now filled with adults that simply do not like the outdoors.

 

It didn't happen overnight.   Not sure when it began.   A little in the '70s.   More in the '80s.  Much more at the turn of the century.

 

You see them everywhere, the anti-outdoor crowd.   District.   WB staff.   Large populations at council.   Definitely well stocked at Irving.

 

They aren't obvious, but you can identify them quite easily.   They push programming/events that take place in town.   They thrive at meetings.   Kinda glum and uncomfortable when visiting a camporee.   More than likely won't spend a night in a tent.   If they venture as far as the council summer camp, it's for something like WB that involves picnic tables and ppt presentations in the mess hall.

 

To each their own.   Scouting has always had folks that aren't outdoors people, and everyone found their niche.   The problem today:   the non-outdoor people out-number the outdoor people quite a bit, especially in key positions that determine strategy, vision, and resource allocation.     In the past, the non-outdoor people just did their thing and kept quiet.   Not so anymore.   They impact the image and programming of scouting, and not for the better.

 

To me, it boils down to "birds of a feather."  The BSA hasn't projected a rugged outdoor image in many years.   The public at large knows this.   Many dynamic people who thrive in the outdoors take a look at the BSA and say "no thanks."   Why?   They don't see any like-minded people in the BSA, or very few.   

 

The BSA would be wise to ditch the passive/pie in the sky initiatives/management speak (as demonstrated in the article by Mike), and get outdoors.   High adventure or camping at the local farmer's property.   Doesn't matter.   Let that centennial uniform get a few bacon grease stains.  Have that campaign hat become a bit bent at the brim and otherwise stained with dust and sweat.  Get back to scouting's roots.

 

Scouting's successful future is going to be based on scouting's successful past.   This current baloney dreamed up by Irving--teams of graduated DEs/SEs with MBAs that don't like outdoor adventure, giving smooth briefings in the conference room--ain't going to cut it.

 

The numbers tell the story.

 

Well, I'm glum on camporees, but it's not because I don't like camping, it's because I've had to hear the boys in the troop next door whispering and talking until 3 am.  That, and I hate camporees. 

[Krampus 696]

Well, I'm glum on camporees, but it's not because I don't like camping, it's because I've had to hear the boys in the troop next door whispering and talking until 3 am.  That, and I hate camporees. 

It's okay. They get to hear me making breakfast and drinking coffee at 6am with the other adults in our troop. They get the message pretty quickly.

[perdidochas 658]

@@Eagle94-A1 Besides the units I UC for, I am involved with church youth groups, youth historical interpretation groups, youth canoe and kayak outdoor groups an youth school groups dealing with the school's outdoor program.  The dynamics of scouting without the policy restrictions seem to generate more positive growth in their respective programs than those I deal with in the BSA program.  The stuff that worked 50 years ago still work today.  The stuff they do today doesn't seem to.   I think.@@JoeBob is correct when he notes: "The decline is numbers is not a problem.  The decline in the quality of the program is."

 

When one uses the dynamics of "ancient Green Bar Bill" material and Greenleaf's Servant Leadership dynamics in a church youth group and one has its members serving on the church board, it's something that other people recognize as a positive contribution.  Having free reign outside of BSA and the youth program thrives and the same person restricted by BSA policies political and legal and the programs struggle and flounder, one must seriously take a look at why that is happening.  

 

70 scouts - 8 adults - National Jamboree

12 Venturing scouts - 6 adults - National 150th Gettysburg reenactment (50,000 participants) as reenactors 

 

66 youth - 2 adults - Church youth gathering, downtown Minneapolis

112 youth - 3 adults - Church youth gathering, downtown New Orleans

 

 

Anyone here on the forum have the courage to take 112 scouts anywhere with just 3 adults?  Probably not, BSA won't allow it.

 

 

Well, my church wouldn't allow that ratio either. 

[Stosh 3452]

Well, my church wouldn't allow that ratio either. 

 

Not all churches treat their members the same.

[David CO 1783]

I am shocked, shocked, at the animosity toward professional scouters.