Troops not meeting the week of Thanksgiving and over Christmas break? This is a thing now?

[Armymutt]

Our troop isn't meeting tonight due to Thanksgiving.  Seems odd, since it's Tuesday and Thanksgiving is two days away.  We also didn't meet on Veterans Day, for some reason.  I also found out that we aren't meeting for two weeks in December.  This seems rather Cub Scoutish.  Is this normal now?  My troops growing up met unless it was Christmas or Independence Day.  If kids went out of town, fine, they missed the meeting.  No big deal.  Everyone else had the opportunity to get together and have fun.  

[InquisitiveScouter]

If you meet in a military facility, that might end quickly also...

https://www.npr.org/2025/11/25/nx-s1-5615164/pentagon-scouting-hegseth-cut-ties

Not sure this will gain traction, though...

[Tron]

In my opinion this is a sign of burnout in the leadership. In my opinion you want to meet every week unless a holiday falls exactly on the meeting day. What I have seen personally is that units who are looking for these excuses are suffering burnout in the leadership. The two week gap screams to me that the leadership is burned out and that their scouts are probably in a situation where they don't need the meetings to advance so it's just a burden meeting to those families.

[Tron]

4 minutes ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

If you meet in a military facility, that might end quickly also...

https://www.npr.org/2025/11/25/nx-s1-5615164/pentagon-scouting-hegseth-cut-ties

Not sure this will gain traction, though...

Going to be really hard to enforce. Garrison commanders have an extreme amount of authority and flexibility on how they run the base(s) under their command. It's highly unlikely that any order will explicitly state that US military cannot partner or work with etc ... Scouting America; instead it will likely state something like "no diversion of mission critical resources"; which plays into the garrison commanders ability to basically do whatever he wants. 

[InquisitiveScouter]

That was quick... this just in my inbox:

 

Statement Regarding NPR Story on Scouting and the U.S. Military Scouting Family,   This morning NPR aired a story about a supposed leaked Pentagon memo directing the U.S. Military to sever ties with Scouting America. According to the story, the draft memo, which has not been sent to Congress, indicates that the Secretary of War plans to cease support for youth in Scouting programs on military bases in the U.S. and overseas, cut support for the National Jamboree, and eliminate increases in pay grade for Eagle Scouts who enlist in the military.   Listen to the story here or you can read the story here.   We are surprised and deeply saddened by this news. The Scouting movement has had a strong relationship with our nation’s military going back more than a century. From the tremendous support of the West Virginia National Guard at our National Jamborees to Scout troops that provide stability for the children of military families deployed around the globe, our nation’s military has walked side-by-side with Scouts for generations. An enormous percentage of those in our military academies are Scouts and Eagle Scouts. Our Scouts and leaders admire and are inspired by our military heroes. Many of our Scouts trade their Scouting uniforms for the uniforms of our nation’s armed forces.   According to the story, the draft memo purports that the Scouting organization is “no longer a meritocracy” and does not hold members to high standards. This view is clearly uninformed. Badges and ranks are not given, they are earned. Just ask any Eagle Scout. Young men and young women alike thrive in Scouting. Scouts wear an American flag on their sleeves and swear a duty to God and country.   Scouting isn’t something we do. It’s something we are.   Scouting will never turn its back on the children of our military families. Just as we always have, Scouts will continue to put duty to country above duty to self and will remain focused on serving all American families in the U.S. and abroad.   Scouting is and has always been a nonpartisan organization. For more than a century, we’ve worked with every U.S. presidential administration – Republican and Democrat – focusing on our common goal of building future leaders grounded in integrity, responsibility, and service. We will continue our efforts to work with the Pentagon to address this critical issue.   At the same time, I encourage each of you to contact your senators and congressional representatives immediately and ask for their support. You can locate contact information for your representative at these links: House and Senate.   Some of you may be discouraged by this news, but, just like the service men and women of our military, a Scout is brave. I see this as a clear call to redouble our efforts. All youth are in crisis today. They need the fun, adventure and the challenging, character-building programs of Scouting more than ever.   Support your local councils. Lift up your fellow volunteer leaders and Scouting families. Let’s prepare the next generation for lives of purpose and impact. Yours in Scouting, Roger Krone Chief Scout Executive President & CEO Scouting America

[Armymutt]

We are chartered to a civilian organization.  This will be interesting for our Cub Scout pack though.  I will say that there is a grain of truth in the lack of standards being upheld.  As far as our troop, we have very few Scouts who are above First Class, so doing advancement at meetings is vital.  However, our PLC is failing them by not actually doing advancement.  

[Tron]

1 hour ago, InquisitiveScouter said:

That was quick... this just in my inbox:

 

Statement Regarding NPR Story on Scouting and the U.S. Military Scouting Family,   This morning NPR aired a story about a supposed leaked Pentagon memo directing the U.S. Military to sever ties with Scouting America. According to the story, the draft memo, which has not been sent to Congress, indicates that the Secretary of War plans to cease support for youth in Scouting programs on military bases in the U.S. and overseas, cut support for the National Jamboree, and eliminate increases in pay grade for Eagle Scouts who enlist in the military.   Listen to the story here or you can read the story here.   We are surprised and deeply saddened by this news. The Scouting movement has had a strong relationship with our nation’s military going back more than a century. From the tremendous support of the West Virginia National Guard at our National Jamborees to Scout troops that provide stability for the children of military families deployed around the globe, our nation’s military has walked side-by-side with Scouts for generations. An enormous percentage of those in our military academies are Scouts and Eagle Scouts. Our Scouts and leaders admire and are inspired by our military heroes. Many of our Scouts trade their Scouting uniforms for the uniforms of our nation’s armed forces.   According to the story, the draft memo purports that the Scouting organization is “no longer a meritocracy” and does not hold members to high standards. This view is clearly uninformed. Badges and ranks are not given, they are earned. Just ask any Eagle Scout. Young men and young women alike thrive in Scouting. Scouts wear an American flag on their sleeves and swear a duty to God and country.   Scouting isn’t something we do. It’s something we are.   Scouting will never turn its back on the children of our military families. Just as we always have, Scouts will continue to put duty to country above duty to self and will remain focused on serving all American families in the U.S. and abroad.   Scouting is and has always been a nonpartisan organization. For more than a century, we’ve worked with every U.S. presidential administration – Republican and Democrat – focusing on our common goal of building future leaders grounded in integrity, responsibility, and service. We will continue our efforts to work with the Pentagon to address this critical issue.   At the same time, I encourage each of you to contact your senators and congressional representatives immediately and ask for their support. You can locate contact information for your representative at these links: House and Senate.   Some of you may be discouraged by this news, but, just like the service men and women of our military, a Scout is brave. I see this as a clear call to redouble our efforts. All youth are in crisis today. They need the fun, adventure and the challenging, character-building programs of Scouting more than ever.   Support your local councils. Lift up your fellow volunteer leaders and Scouting families. Let’s prepare the next generation for lives of purpose and impact. Yours in Scouting, Roger Krone Chief Scout Executive President & CEO Scouting America

Yeah, super fast. Never seen national respond to anything this fast in my entire tenure with this organization. 

45 minutes ago, Armymutt said:

We are chartered to a civilian organization.  This will be interesting for our Cub Scout pack though.  I will say that there is a grain of truth in the lack of standards being upheld.  As far as our troop, we have very few Scouts who are above First Class, so doing advancement at meetings is vital.  However, our PLC is failing them by not actually doing advancement.  

That's where the guardrails need to come into place; PLC should be deciding what's going on but not to the detriment of the program. EG: PLC decides they want to do everything but advancement which circumvents the policy that every scout should have the opportunity to advance to 1st Class and Star soon there after within 12-18 months of joining. If routine and basic rank advancement items are not making it onto the calendar the adults have to step in to remind the PLC what this program is and what HAS to happen. They don't have to do First Aid every meeting but they do have to hit those rank requirement items at least once every 12-18 months, and maps, and etc ... right?

[yknot]

Some units just follow local school district calendars because it affects meeting locations or, for certain families,  school holiday closures affect child care, transportation, etc. It's not new or linked to burnout. It's just local convention in some places. 

 

[Tron]

Just now, yknot said:

Some units just follow local school district calendars because it affects meeting locations or, for certain families,  school holiday closures affect child care, transportation, etc. It's not new or linked to burnout. It's just local convention in some places. 

 

But that's not what this program is. This is a 12 month program designed for a certain amount of activities and meetings each month (based on program). I hear this argument in my district and all of the units that say this are single digit membership and dying. The units that meet every week and do an outing every month have above average retention and are producing AOLS and Eagles. 

I've seen it go both ways. I've seen units adopt a 12 month a year, every week schedule an they grow and retention goes above average. I've seen units go the other direction and reduce meetings and they shrink (or outright die, seen that happen and it happens quick). 

 

[DuctTape]

5 minutes ago, Tron said:

Yeah, super fast. Never seen national respond to anything this fast in my entire tenure with this organization. 

That's where the guardrails need to come into place; PLC should be deciding what's going on but not to the detriment of the program. EG: PLC decides they want to do everything but advancement which circumvents the policy that every scout should have the opportunity to advance to 1st Class and Star soon there after within 12-18 months of joining. If routine and basic rank advancement items are not making it onto the calendar the adults have to step in to remind the PLC what this program is and what HAS to happen. They don't have to do First Aid every meeting but they do have to hit those rank requirement items at least once every 12-18 months, and maps, and etc ... right?

I am not 100% sure I agree. Advancement is a method and the responsibility of the individual scout, it is not the responsibility of the PLC or adults. That said, if a real scouting program was ocurring with real outdoor patrol based events then the opportunity for advancement is inherent. Meetings are mostly for planning the patrol events, games (which practice scoutcraft). In patrol meetings, the PL (or better yet the APL) should be checking in with each member's advancement status and desires and use them to help plan the patrol events. Also bring the needs/desires to PLC to help plan troop games and/or coordinate with another patrol on an outdoor event.

Sure some advancement particulars may take place like a scout asking to be tested on a specific requirement and/or having his PL sign off on one completed at the campout. In general if a meeting has "advancement" as the agenda item, then IMO this is problematic; this says to me the patrols are non-functioning. 

To summarize, a well planned patrol based scouting program will have opportunities for advancement baked in; the individual scout is responsible for his own advancement (encouraged by PL and SM/ASM).

Focus on well functioning patrols, then the PLC and troop meetings will improve. Too many troops fail at this improvement by attempting to start with the PLC and troop instead of the patrol.

[Tron]

1 minute ago, DuctTape said:

I am not 100% sure I agree. Advancement is a method and the responsibility of the individual scout, it is not the responsibility of the PLC or adults. That said, if a real scouting program was ocurring with real outdoor patrol based events then the opportunity for advancement is inherent. Meetings are mostly for planning the patrol events, games (which practice scoutcraft). In patrol meetings, the PL (or better yet the APL) should be checking in with each member's advancement status and desires and use them to help plan the patrol events. Also bring the needs/desires to PLC to help plan troop games and/or coordinate with another patrol on an outdoor event.

Sure some advancement particulars may take place like a scout asking to be tested on a specific requirement and/or having his PL sign off on one completed at the campout. In general if a meeting has "advancement" as the agenda item, then IMO this is problematic; this says to me the patrols are non-functioning. 

To summarize, a well planned patrol based scouting program will have opportunities for advancement baked in; the individual scout is responsible for his own advancement (encouraged by PL and SM/ASM).

Focus on well functioning patrols, then the PLC and troop meetings will improve. Too many troops fail at this improvement by attempting to start with the PLC and troop instead of the patrol.

This isn't correct at all, not from a doctrine standard nor from a practical or rational reasoning method. 

The doctrine in the Troop Leaders Guides Vol 1 & 2 is that advancement is part of the routine meeting methods. 

From a practical and rational reasoning method you don't send someone into a "field" environment without baseline training. Rank advancement is baseline training. Baseline training happens in weekly meetings. Outings are where mastery occurs. You can't someone on a campout without knowing basic baseline knowledge: basics of setting up a campsite, first aid, basic meal planning and cooking, etc...  Within controlled environments such as weekly troop meetings your PLC should be transferring baseline knowledge to the rank-and-file scouts, then at the outings the mastery of such skills should occur. A patrol shouldn't take 3 hours to cook a meal because they had to spend the first 2 hours learning how to start a fire. God help the troop that doesn't teach first aid until an outing and an injury occurs. 

[DuctTape]

3 minutes ago, Tron said:

This isn't correct at all, not from a doctrine standard nor from a practical or rational reasoning method. 

The doctrine in the Troop Leaders Guides Vol 1 & 2 is that advancement is part of the routine meeting methods. 

From a practical and rational reasoning method you don't send someone into a "field" environment without baseline training. Rank advancement is baseline training. Baseline training happens in weekly meetings. Outings are where mastery occurs. You can't someone on a campout without knowing basic baseline knowledge: basics of setting up a campsite, first aid, basic meal planning and cooking, etc...  Within controlled environments such as weekly troop meetings your PLC should be transferring baseline knowledge to the rank-and-file scouts, then at the outings the mastery of such skills should occur. A patrol shouldn't take 3 hours to cook a meal because they had to spend the first 2 hours learning how to start a fire. God help the troop that doesn't teach first aid until an outing and an injury occurs. 

I do not think we are in opposite corners here. My primary focus is on the patrols and their activities (both meetings and outdoor activities). The PLC is NOT the conduit for transferring those baseline skills. This is done by the individual Patrol Leader (possibly with assistance from an Instructor). The PLC is the conduit for organizing the Patrols. Regarding the specific examples, those are a result of a failure all around. My main point is he Patrol is the fundamental unit, the PLC is a coordinating team to assist the patrols within the troop.

[Eagle94-A1]

40 minutes ago, Tron said:

This isn't correct at all, not from a doctrine standard nor from a practical or rational reasoning method. 

The doctrine in the Troop Leaders Guides Vol 1 & 2 is that advancement is part of the routine meeting methods. 

If you look at older BSA literature, @DuctTape is 100% correct. Troop meetings were designed to plan and prepare for trips, and well as competition amongst patrols. Patrol Meetings were where the learning was supposed to take place, with older Scouts working with younger Scouts. Prior to 1989, advancement was not the focus of Scouting, having fun and experiential learning was.

In 1989, the introduction of aged based programs, and especially OPERATION FIRST CLASS (sic), changed the focus to advancement. With aged based patrols, new Scouts were lumped into one patrol with a single older Scout as a Guide to teach and supervise everyone. Challenge with that was burnout because one Scout had to supervise everyone in the patrol, instead of having multiple Scouts mentoring the new guys. That led to adults taking over and turning it into Webelos 3. And the LDS model of segregating their 11 year olds into a separate patrol and having an assigned ASM to work with them, as in Cub Scouts, was the model for this.  LDS 11 year old patrols had a very adult led and regimented program which led to constant repetition of the program. But because the 11 yo Scouts moved to a traditional patrol at 12, they never saw the repetition. And the adults, not the Scouts, created a program designed to get them to First Class in a year. Scouts had no input.

But OPERATION FIRST CLASS was the main cause for the change of focus from fun and adventure, to advancement. BSA's research showed that Scouts who got First Class in 12-18 months stayed longer in Scouts. As a result National pushed advancement. But the research data had some major flaws IMHO. As an older Scout I commented that the data did not take into account how active a troop is. A "hiking and camping troop" with fun monthly outdoor activities will retain Scouts, and provide more opportunities for advancement.  And I learned later as an adult is that LDS troops heavily influenced the data. First and foremost, every LDS male was registered, whether active or not. And LDS units had a fixed 11 year old program designed to get them to First Class before joining the rest of the troop. Even doing only 4 camp outs and no summer camp at 11, they got First Class stayed registered, even if they didn't show up again.

 But maybe I am an old fogey stuck in the past. My troop has not focused on advancement, but fun and adventure. Our Scouts stuck around until they aged out, or went off to college. And two Eagles did activities with us in college and before aging out. We are now in single digits, and folding at the end of the year. We have not had a feeder pack in over 15 years, relying on word of mouth and Scouts dissatisfied with their original troops to keep our numbers up.  But several troops we would get Scouts from have folded, and the remaining ones took notes from us, and are doing more activities and being more youth led to prevent folks from leaving.  The last time we had Webelos visit, some parents didn't like the amount of camping we did, or our emphasis on fun and adventure; advancement is the Scout's responsibility. There is a quote attributed to Baden-Powell, " Advancement is like a suntan, it just happens in the outdoors."

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Eagle94-A1

[Armymutt]

I was in four different troops as a kid.  The first was worthless, so I quit Scouts.  The second was in its 56th year, the SM having been a member for 55 years.  It was small at that point - my patrol had 3 and the other 4.  The meetings were advancement focused, but we never noticed.  We worked on skill awards, had competitons, etc.  My next one was a Mormon troop in England.  I think there were 8 or 9 of us.  All of us arrived as First or Second Class, so there was a little advancement, but mostly is was Scout skills (which is advancement) and some advanced woodcraft.  The SM was an F-111 pilot.  My last troop was bigger - about 15.  Two patrols, mixed ages.  We trained as patrols and the adults tested, if I recall correctly.  I was a Life Scout by then, so it was just MBs for me.  

We also don't have patrol meetings.  We've tried doing it, but I feel like we have too many Scouts who are there out of force.  They play around, which frustrates the Scouts who want to be there, and nothing gets done.  

[InquisitiveScouter]

6 minutes ago, Armymutt said:

We've tried doing it, but I feel like we have too many Scouts who are there out of force.  They play around, which frustrates the Scouts who want to be there, and nothing gets done.  

We just had this discussion at a leaders meeting... Our Committee Chair is going to communicate with parents about this and try to tell them something to this effect...  "If your son does not want to go to Scouts, please do not force him.  This is detrimental to all of us, and your Scout will only wind up resenting you.  Let them choose, please."