Jump to content
Cburkhardt

Major Changes Announced -- Councils Impacted

Recommended Posts

I am an optimist and view things quite directly and simply.  There are very lengthy and detailed discussions about the addition of female members and the concept of "Family Scouting" that anyone on this site can go back and read.  I carefully followed the debate and read the surveys that were widely distributed back then and was convinced that admitting siblings who were girls into separate Troops was the right way to go.  I'm not going to go back and re-discuss that content, other than to say it was very convincing and made common sense.

The Family Scouting policy did not change one word in either the Scout Handbook or the Scoutmaster's Handbook.  They just changed pictures to include girls.  So, I am just following the identical program we always did with 32 girls, a 9-member Scoutmaster staff, a 10-member Troop Committee and an amazingly supportive CO.  The Family Scouting policy did not change human nature though.  The hovering parents we have always had have simply continued their same behaviors.  The only difference I have experienced is that girl members are a lot better at telling their parents to not become over-involved.  I'm happy to accept that you have experienced an excessive number of hovering parents in your Troops, because those personalities have always existed around Troops and must always be dealt with by Scoutmaster Staffs -- or they will over-run the sensible operation and program experience of our youth members.

What I do not accept is that there is some explosion of additional numbers of hover parents because we now have multiple siblings of different sexes in separate Scouts BSA Troops.  That is not my experience or the experience of the of the leaders of other Troops in our districts that are Family Scouting.  Scout leaders who don't address the situation will experience negative results.  It is that simple.  It is not a problem in our Troop because in the four instances that arose, we dealt with it effectively.  

Policies that allow parents of Scouts to camp at the same location as their Scout is really a different issue.  This is not Family Scouting, it is the Family Camping policy of the BSA we are speaking of.  In our Troop, we do not allow it.  It is easy to enforce because everyone must be a registered member to attend a campout.  We also make it very clear that we don't want parents to come on weekend campouts in order to allow the girls to gain confidence.  A Scoutmaster who allows excessive numbers of parents to camp on weekend campouts is asking for the trouble you relate.  What we do allow if for any parent who wants to camp with us to do so in September.  We do that under the Family Camping rules.  But that is it.

I would be happy to have families of our scouts camp elsewhere on our camp properties as long as they do not show up at our camp until Sunday pick-up time.  This has been successfully engaged in at the Owasippe Scout Reservation since 1957.  Here is a link to the family camp, which also operates in the summer and has a special program offered directly to the families:  https://www.owasippeadventure.com/blackhawk-1-1   The Owasippe family camp has been so successful through the years that it was the model followed by Philmont when they designed the family camp there.  In fact, if we hold on to the bases, there will be family camps at the other bases in the future.

If you have a different view of Family Scouting or the Family Camping policies and wish to see them handled differently or even repealed in the post-bankruptcy phase, I invite you to directly address that issue in a posting.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

I am an optimist and view things quite directly and simply.  There are very lengthy and detailed discussions about the addition of female members and the concept of "Family Scouting" that anyone on this site can go back and read.  I carefully followed the debate and read the surveys that were widely distributed back then and was convinced that admitting siblings who were girls into separate Troops was the right way to go.  I'm not going to go back and re-discuss that content, other than to say it was very convincing and made common sense.

The Family Scouting policy did not change one word in either the Scout Handbook or the Scoutmaster's Handbook.  They just changed pictures to include girls.  So, I am just following the identical program we always did with 32 girls, a 9-member Scoutmaster staff, a 10-member Troop Committee and an amazingly supportive CO.  The Family Scouting policy did not change human nature though.  The hovering parents we have always had have simply continued their same behaviors.  The only difference I have experienced is that girl members are a lot better at telling their parents to not become over-involved.  I'm happy to accept that you have experienced an excessive number of hovering parents in your Troops, because those personalities have always existed around Troops and must always be dealt with by Scoutmaster Staffs -- or they will over-run the sensible operation and program experience of our youth members.

What I do not accept is that there is some explosion of additional numbers of hover parents because we now have multiple siblings of different sexes in separate Scouts BSA Troops.  That is not my experience or the experience of the of the leaders of other Troops in our districts that are Family Scouting.  Scout leaders who don't address the situation will experience negative results.  It is that simple.  It is not a problem in our Troop because in the four instances that arose, we dealt with it effectively.  

Policies that allow parents of Scouts to camp at the same location as their Scout is really a different issue.  This is not Family Scouting, it is the Family Camping policy of the BSA we are speaking of.  In our Troop, we do not allow it.  It is easy to enforce because everyone must be a registered member to attend a campout.  We also make it very clear that we don't want parents to come on weekend campouts in order to allow the girls to gain confidence.  A Scoutmaster who allows excessive numbers of parents to camp on weekend campouts is asking for the trouble you relate.  What we do allow if for any parent who wants to camp with us to do so in September.  We do that under the Family Camping rules.  But that is it.

I would be happy to have families of our scouts camp elsewhere on our camp properties as long as they do not show up at our camp until Sunday pick-up time.  This has been successfully engaged in at the Owasippe Scout Reservation since 1957.  Here is a link to the family camp, which also operates in the summer and has a special program offered directly to the families:  https://www.owasippeadventure.com/blackhawk-1-1   The Owasippe family camp has been so successful through the years that it was the model followed by Philmont when they designed the family camp there.  In fact, if we hold on to the bases, there will be family camps at the other bases in the future.

If you have a different view of Family Scouting or the Family Camping policies and wish to see them handled differently or even repealed in the post-bankruptcy phase, I invite you to directly address that issue in a posting.

I'm appreciative of how it is working for you.  And, that is how we handle it as well.  The big problem is just the use of the term Family Scouting.  Drop the 'Family'- it is just Scouting, and that moniker just seems to have invited a bit of the ignoring the second word in the two phrases for a few in the past year from what I have heard from other unit leaders in my district.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, yknot said:

 

If any help was coming from Congress, it would have been here by now. I'm not sure what value anyone thinks that charter holds. I'd love to see Congress step in and buy scout camps en masse as a national initiative. In the summer they could serve as scout camps or dual community/scout camps; off season they could serve a host of other purposes that this recent crisis has identified. However, it won't happen. 

I don't believe that it is the purpose of Congress to step in and buy assets or property that would be primarily for the benefit of any particular business or non-profit org. The government already owns enough property that could be utilized if that were the case.  As a taxpayer, if the government bought the properties, I'd want them opened up for public access, not kept nearly exclusively for the use of any particular private group.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

What I do not accept is that there is some explosion of additional numbers of hover parents because we now have multiple siblings of different sexes in separate Scouts BSA Troops.  That is not my experience or the experience of the of the leaders of other Troops in our districts that are Family Scouting. 

You are right, helicopters have been around for a while. But as I said previously it is the term "FAMILY SCOUTING" is the problem, not girls in Scouting. The general population equates "Family Scouting" to "Family Camping," and not "brothers and sisters" in Scouting. BSA has advertised as Scouting for the whole family, and for the general public that includes adults. And BSA has not helped matters. Do you remember the Scouting Magazine issue dedicated to family camping? Do you remember that the ages of the children were SCOUTS BSA aged youth? That was a major mixed message.  And I am seeing more of the helicopter parents since the term "Family Scouting" first cameout.

 

42 minutes ago, Cburkhardt said:

 Scout leaders who don't address the situation will experience negative results.  It is that simple.  It is not a problem in our Troop because in the four instances that arose, we dealt with it effectively.  

I'm glad you have not had the issues I have faced. And I admit I did not agree with the decisions of the SM in my old troop. Instead of trying to mentor and compromise with the adults for over 19 months, after the third instance of the adult not following the instructions and interfering I would have had a conference and give them an ultimatum: follow the troops' rules, or we can help you find a troop that will meet your needs better. I told the other adults that they were hurting the other Scouts in the troop in their attempt to save the Scouts of the helicopters.

But I can tell you the discussions on this matter all included the terms "Family Friendly" "Family Scouting," and "Family Camping" all interchangably. And those parents constantly  reminded us that BSA gives them every right to accompany their child to any activity. At least until the 72 hour rule went into effect 0ctober 1, 2018. That is what the COR used to fix the problem,and save the troop.

1 hour ago, Cburkhardt said:

I would be happy to have families of our scouts camp elsewhere on our camp properties as long as they do not show up at our camp until Sunday pick-up time.  This has been successfully engaged in at the Owasippe Scout Reservation since 1957.  Here is a link to the family camp, which also operates in the summer and has a special program offered directly to the families:  https://www.owasippeadventure.com/blackhawk-1-1  

But even when parents camp away, I have seen issues. Remember the nightmare camp out I told you about? The two adults causing the problems were camping with the Webelos in a different campsite. No policy prevented them from driving from their campsite to the Scout campsite and taking over.

And while the program you provided a link to is nice, It appears that it is a completely separate section of the Scout reservation. I don't know how many councils  have the space to do that, mine doesn't, nor the financial resources to do it today, especially with the threat of bankruptcy and COVID-19. Heck even before all this mess started, I know the Council I was in 30 years ago with the 1600+ acre  Scout reservation had to nix the creation of a new Boy Scout camp because they could not support two separate camps: a Boy Scout camp and Cub Scout  camp

1 hour ago, Cburkhardt said:

If you have a different view of Family Scouting or the Family Camping policies and wish to see them handled differently or even repealed in the post-bankruptcy phase, I invite you to directly address that issue in a posting.

Can I answer here?

Regarding the term "Family Scouting," get rid of it. Use SCOUTING or whatever term the GSUSA will allow us to use since we apparently lost the rights to that name despite being the older organization. And keep "Family" out of it.

As for Family Camping, keep it at the Cub Scout level. I would severely limit it at the Scouts BSA, and higher levels ( if they exist post bankruptcy). A troop's PLC may want one on occasion. But it should be stressed  BY NATIONAL that PLCs are responsible for program and not adults. But adults doing program for the Scouts is a different discussion for a different day.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cburkhardt said:

Most of the time was taken by awarding the Silver Antelopes and Silver Buffalos for our Region

Yes.  Even in a crisis, they do somehow manage to keep a focus on their priorities. 

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, David CO said:

Yes.  Even in a crisis, they do somehow manage to keep a focus on their priorities. 

It was surreal. I called in, listened to their awards section, and then that was over, then Zoom was like meeting ended. I was wondering when we were going to get to how we are going to turn around membership numbers or what to say/do during the dark media times ahead.  Nope. Regional OA chief open, says nothing as one of the 2 youth on the call, Venturing President (don’t know the title) gives an oath of office, and that is it. No discussion of who is doing what or whatever to right the ship. Lots of accolades for the nominating committee for the next slate of officers. NO ACTION nothing to take home, or do, or change. Ride the ship down while we make sure the band plays right song? 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friends, it's looking very, very bad. I have a complete lack of trust in National right now. I'll see if I can somehow get the link to the town hall last night. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, carebear3895 said:

Friends, it's looking very, very bad. I have a complete lack of trust in National right now. I'll see if I can somehow get the link to the town hall last night. 

Please share.  I'd love to be on these things.  Maybe it's just the Covid-19 hangover, but this is like the high drama spectacle to see right now I think! 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a natural skeptic, and I take only about 10 percent of what I see on these pages as something to more than peruse.  Having been on this board longer than most, I watched the drama between a number of posters that became sometimes almost abusive, and often hard to fathom or believe.  The tendency of too many of us, and I am sure I have so exhibited at times, is to become bull headed and not willing to "listen" and "consider".  This in turn leads to stalemates and often jaded attitudes and eventually to lack of involvement.  But it also often becomes a crusade by the few, the ones that are like the proverbial dog with its bone.  I cannot help but fear we have a few posters on here that may be foxes in the henhouse, pushing snippets of rumor and negative issues from the drawn out legal issues.  Some seem almost to be virtually laughing and smiling at the worst of the possible outcomes.  As I keep trying to stay focussed on local program, I hope that the more rational and silent supporters may somehow find a voice.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big talk right now is fees going up to $66 in August. Honestly, they could've raised it 1 cent and you will see an exodus just based on principle. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, skeptic said:

To the ambulance chasers:  At some point the turnip patches will go fallow.

 

They will just move on to the next turnip patch …. just wait to see how much they make on Covid-19. 

I don't think they care if BSA exists after the lawsuits or not, they just want another vacation home or a larger boat.  If little Billy doesn't have a canoe for summer camp, they don't care.  They may claim they are doing this for the better of society, but that is garbage.  Look at the cars they buy, the homes they live in … they are about 1 thing, money.

Edited by Eagle1993
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...