All Activity

Had some MBC situations this year myself; it's all about if you don't like that I run the MB program as designed find someone else. People hate it when I say it, but it's like running a Walmart, people hate it and complain but we'll see them shopping here again tomorrow. Having IOLS is still required it's just buried a bit. The requirement is that you have to have at least 1 trained SM/ASM on every overnight outing. To be considered a trained SM/ASM you have to have IOLS. BTW hazardous weather is required to be trained now, it's been moved by national into DL/CM/ASM/SM training; can't wait to see people start to fall out of trained status when their hazardous weather expires in a year or two.

Too few adults, and resulting drop in expectations resulting by BSA are not a good combo. Not that many years ago, it was a requirement that at least one adult leader on a Scouts BSA overnight outing had to be IOLS trained. That is no longer the case (why the requirement that there had to be someone BALOO trained for Cubs, and not any requirement in Scouts BSA, IDK). IOLS can be run poorly, but by and large in my experiences those who staffed the trainings I was involved in knew what we were doing (at least within a certain skillset- I was usually woods tools and knots myself), and were dedicated to make it as fun and informative as we could, while emphasizing the real objective was to demonstrate the Patrol Method. I'd love to see some reports from a national level on just how many units don't have someone who has been IOLS trained. If you have units rolling with adult leaders who don't truly get the program, it's a big ask to who may have been the only willing volunteer to be a Commissioner and expect that person is going to impart anything onto that adult. Most of the Commissioners, whether they be Council, District, or Unit that I have interacted with in the last decade+ have been retirement age, long since been active to a unit, and often have been pressed into it. The results often were mixed, especially in light of the later part.

I remember that exact project as a kid. I recall my NatGeo picture was of a bird. Either a cardinal or blue jay. 99.9% of my cub memories were doing stuff like that with my den. The pack rarely met as a group except for the B&G dinner. I agree KIS, the "S" is for "simple", and also "small". Dens meet and do stuff, get rid of pack meetings except for once/twice a year at most. Don't even start as a pack meeting, then split off. This rarely works well.

MiF KiS,,,, arts and crafts,,,, Make gifts for mom and dad (and brother/sister? wadda concept). The Scoutcraft stuff can be included, should be included as the Cubs grow into it, but the Make it Fun Keep it Simple has to be the watch word. Give the Cubs , no matter their age, things they can accomplish and take pride in. Long time ago, I remember taking scraps of plywood, sanding them smooth, gluing pretty National Geographic photos to them and then CAREFULLY shellacking them . After they dried , we glued picture hanging hooks on the back, and PRESTO , Mom Day presents. Along the way, we went hiking, learned about birds, visited the zoo and local firehouses. I kept many of those kids as friends all thru high school and into adulthood.. Were my parents involved? Absolutely. Were the other parents involved? Absolutely. Are things that changed, maybe three generations later? Perhaps, but that's what we are here for, for the Societal History. Today's parents must be made aware of the need to make their kids feel worthy and loved, so that THEY will want THEIR kids to feel worthy and loved. "The purpose of life is the planting of trees under whose shade one does not expect to sit".

Although I was a Boy Scout myself, my son is still in Cubs and my perspective these days is more from a Cub parent. We're fortunate to have a good group of parents running our Pack; however, there are many instances where I would go about things differently than other leaders (but settle for good enough). I understand the calculus changes a bit with Scout Troops. For now, the work is getting done and the kids are having fun, getting outside, exercising, socializing, etc. I'm not going nitpick my fellow volunteers. I'm just thankful for the support we do receive.

In our district, we tend to see two kinds of units - larger units of 30+ scouts and smaller units of 15 or less scouts. The larger packs and troops have a deeper adult team that is supporting a wider array of activities. They routinely bring in 6 or more new scouts every year. They're active in the OA, participate in camporee, their leaders often jump over and help with district wide trainings and events. The smaller packs and troops have a small core team of leaders and don't recruit much. They tend to hang on year to year, but they don't tend to see a lot of new members. We rarely see them. Packs need a lot of adults period - 2 adults per den of 6-8 cubs. Another 4-8 adults providing pack level support - CC, CM, 2x Asst. CM, membership, treasurer, fundraising, advancement chair, and so on. Troops are a bit different. From a working directly with the Scouts perspective, yes troops do need fewer ASMs that help week to week. But they need a supporting group of ASMs to attend weekend trips. A monthly trip is a big ask for anyone and a supporting group of ASMs can really lighten that load. Another area where adults help is troop operations - troops need even more adult operations support than packs. Eagle projects, boards of review, merit badge, more fundraising, specialty skills, and so on. I think the reason we see two general size groups is that units with good programs that recruit adults to help with operations tend to grow. Units with good programs that don't recruit adults to help, end up with overburdened program leaders. There are of course exceptions - some small units simply want to be small. These units are not that common around here.

Lot of them currently listed on ebay

I sometimes find them at estate sales.

I've got a buddy who is looking for an old Boy Scout axe with the logo on it. Seeing how many of you have been involved way longer than I have. where can I find one for him? I thought it would make a pretty cool Christmas present. Thanks!

“A knot is never “nearly right”; it is either exactly right or it is hopelessly wrong, one or the other; there is nothing in between. This is not the impossibly high standard of the idealist, it is a mere fact for the realist to face.” – Clifford Ashley, author Ashley Book of Knots

I understand what you are saying, but my experience with adults is that less is more. Adults tend to hinder the scouts' growth in character because, by their nature, adults don't like youth making bad decisions. I'm not sure what you consider average skills. Are knots, lashings, and orienteering average skills you're speaking about? Still, the troop program is designed so that scouts lead and manage their activities. That program doesn't require many adults. Of course, scouts have to continually grow to develop the skills for dealing with the responsibilities of running the program and their personal growth. A mature program requires a minimum number of adults because the scouts are responsible for the program's activities and business, including training. The challenge for units is having a resource pool of skilled experts to prevent stumping scout growth. Barry

Is it "Good Enough" ? Worksheets for Merit Badges.... Texting LOL, LMAO, letters not written, knots that don't hold, "like", "hacks" that have nothing to do with axes or hatchets or cheap taxis or lousy attorneys,,, Believe what I say despite what you see, "You mean I CAN make that decision?", "What if everybody acted like that, eh?" Well, I was only joking, I didn't really MEAN that, it's just a manner of speaking, it's what everybody says.... History is what we agree on, not what we have proof of.... Oh, I'll never use that silly knot... "Oh, I have people to take care of that." We can pay for that , no need to do it ourselves. It's easier to use paper plates and plastic stuff.... Well, the other Merit Badge Counselor let me... "Was THAT good enough?" Can't we get an extension for my boy? He's only late by a few days.... I can't take off work for this, isn't there someone else that can lead this hike/meeting/training/show and sell? What are we paying these dues for, anyway? I want my kid to be a Scout, it will get him a higher rating when he joins the military/applies for college/trains for the Olympics/fills out the application for (fill in the blank)....

Respectfully, I feel like that enough parents with average skills could still put on a good program. The biggest problems occur when a small number of average leaders are over-burdened by a high number of drop-off parents and/or poorly behaved kids. I would settle for a culture of Very Good. If you have enough leaders/parents willing to take kids outside or plan a fun unit meeting, there is a good chance that your program can be sustained.

And there in lies the problem. Get out and do. Way to much focus on classroom merit badges, class instruction, checking boxes, adult leaders preventing experiential learning. How many times have we seen discussions on how to game the system so a Scout can get 20 nights camping? The goal should be to go out and do things, not just meet a metric. 20 nights should be simple to attain, and the Scout will learn volumes along the way. We were looking at what an AOL needs to do in order to earn arrow of light now, apparently camp with a BSA troop is no longer a thing, visit yes, but they can camp with their patrol. But, looking at the "Adventures" the first multiple pages is about safety considerations; food allergies anaphylaxis and epi-pens, behavior around campfires, etc etc etc. No doubt all good things, but this "safety moment" (and it's more than a moment) is front and center for every Adventure. Safety is important, but that cannot be our reason for being. To a parent new to the program, is this the right "Go to Market" thinking? Then they move into a BSA Troop, and "GASP!!!", the youth do stuff on their own!!. Scouts is OUTSIDE and doing stuff. The leadership training should be a less formal item and more something they experience and grow from. They will screw up, we as adult leaders can assist in making the course correction. The simplicity of the Troop program is that a 12 year old whom ignores advice and input and gets wet when their tent leaks or sleeps cold when they did not bring the recommended gear LEARNS A LESSON from THEIR actions. They hopefully realize they need to do better. Later, maybe as they go off to college or first job, they can recall that all advice is not bad. They can help themselves be better.

Yes, my delegating comment was for the program 25 or 30 years ago when there were still many experienced Scouters. My point about the adults in today's scouts program is a different situation. I'm pretty creative when looking for solutions, but this one is a challenge. The program now, whatever it's called (part of the problem), needs big changes in identity and training. Barry

As you point out, many now have no outdoors/Scouting experience... so to whom are they to delegate?

Yeah, we could do a wiki and generate most of the materials coming out of National. Including the Scout Handbook.

And this is where the problem begins. National has zero interest or motivation for scouting to be a quality program. By design councils (and units) exist for the benefit of HQ. By extension units exist to benefit councils. The system needs to be flipped. National HQ primary responsibility should be to support councils, and Councils primary responsibility should be to support units. National should be using big$ donations to fund the basics of the councils. Councils should not be begging scouters and parents via FOS. Camporees should not be used as a means to generate revenue b/c HQ refuses to fund their own system. At present, IMO, National HQ serves no purpose to scouts, units or councils.

If the unit commissioner isn't working, it's the DE's fault. I have seen districts with great Commission Corp, and it's a beautiful thing to watch. However, the DC's job is complicated and requires above-average skills and training. Most districts don't recruit people capable of developing and using those skills. Yep. In the earlier days, before 1990, 80% of unit leaders were scouts as a youth. So, they walked knowing more about the game than the purpose. They basically stepped into the position running, and the implementation wasn't overly complex. Today's unit is lucky to have 25% leaders with a youth scouting experience. Training just doesn't meet the need for new adult leaders without a youth scouting experience. It's not so simple. Learning the skills on your list, much less knowing when to use them, takes a long time. One-year first-class scouts are typically terrible with skills. Mostly because a program that encourages earning First Class in one year isn't a good skills program anyway. I've trained and counseled a lot of scoutmasters without a youth scouting experience, and most quit in a couple of years, realizing they were not right for the job. However, I believe they would have been fine if they had been willing to delegate skills they lacked to others. I had the skills but rarely needed them because I was a delegator and liked to get other people involved. And, there are very few skills adults need to know that older scouts can't do themselves. But, in almost every case of the scoutmasters I counseled, the scoutmaster took on the responsibility because they wanted to be head honcho, and the responsibilities didn't look hard. Their ego was the problem. The program has a big challenge today because most of the leaders they get today don't have an understanding of the program from youth experience, so they see it from a different perspective. Typically, it is not a perspective that is fun for the youth. Also, the program has changed in the last few years, so its newer identity is not attractive to the last generation of scouts. My 37- and 40-year-old sons aren't interested in being leaders because what they see doesn't appear like the program they had in the late 90s. Barry

I've gotten into the weeds of what publicly is disclosed on council revenue sources and there is nothing going from national to councils. Councils are just as much a franchisee as units are.

I think there are 2 problems with the commissioner corps; First there is no enforcement so the efforts of the commissioner can become a huge waste of time (If a unit repeatedly gets low evaluations or refuses to meet why are council executives renewing those charters?). Secondly to be blunt there are too many scouting bro's scratching each others back. When a commissioner witnesses YPT and GTSS violations they need to thrown the bad leaders under the bus, not sweep the issue under the rug. I think this goes back to service. At the cub level the parents can't just disappear once their scout crosses to a troop. We need a culture of lingering at the pack to pass on knowledge, hold hands a little, help those new parents get their feet under them. Most cub packs are like starting a new business with all new employees year-over-year. I think a good scout executive can fix this in every council by treating JTE/Quality Unit/Whatever the new program as mandatory to recharter, and publicly posts the scores. If units get caught lying on their JTE, yank the charter. How many packs and troops would fix their problems in a heartbeat if they had to deal with parents that really knew what was going on in a unit? An alternative, every January districts should have to run a class for AOL and perspective new parents on how to identify properly functioning units. Think of an AOL parent who gets a 15min crash course on patrol method and how they would steer their kids to units?

The last post that I quickly saw related to the Girl scouts dropping was by Ducttape on 10/30. After that I didn't see one directly related. Went into Character, joining and commissioner posts.

Too bad the article didn’t say if what was sold was close to what was expected. Any one have any idea? What about properties now that a couple of years have passed since the evaluations were given and real value received.

Give me a new name and a rough range of dates and I'll split the thread.

This topic has strayed from the original post which was to identify and discuss Catholic diocese and units eliminating their scout programs.