Eagledad

Well OA is an outside organization for scouts of a specific interest, specifically camping and service. It is (was) viewed as an honor organization because the members peers picked them out specifically, and theoretically, for the exceptional camping and service (character) skills. Of course "exceptional", as well as "camping" and "service" skills have changed over the years. I believe the reason the program appeals to older scouts today is because they have the maturity in those areas to plan, organize, and act with those skills. Something troops should be doing. That stuff is boring to young scouts. OA needs to have an appeal that is exceptional to the Troop program. In my opinion, scouts who want super doses of outdoors and/or leadership responsibilities would be naturally attracted to the program. Actually, I feel the program (at least 20 years ago) wasn't failing. It just appeared as failing because they were loosing a lot of scouts by filtering out those who weren't really interested in the OA activities. The recruiting is high because peers aren't selecting the scouts for their skills anymore, they are just picking them because they were next in line. The maturity requirements of the program drives immature scouts away, or the program reduces itself to a boring program to reach the immature scouts. Where I think OA is failing is the adults advisers don't have good vision for the program. Tehy don't encourage activities that develop above average skills. They don't understand the comradery of working together, so the work camps don't have enough personal social activities. There isn't enough of outdoors development mixed with the service. Arrowmen should practice outdoors a step or two above common troop camp outs. For example, a weekend campout without tents, without stoves, or common cooking tools. Canoeing to a work camp. Rappelling near a trail that requires repair. Camping where the end of the day brings the crew. They should be LNT experts. Arrowmen should hike in and hike out. Building exceptional skills builds pride, and it's just plain fun. A troop wanting to try something new like rappelling or canoeing should only have to go to their troop Arrowmen to ask "how?". Lead us. Character is developed through giving and serving. Service should be visible in the community as much, if not more by the district. Helping a poor family paint their house. Raising food for the local needy. If OA has a bad reputation of slave work, then that is because they aren't spreading their time in the community. Finding service projects is only as far away as asking a church for helping one of their members. Teams of two to five Arrowmen for helping build an wheelchair ramp can be done in just a couple hours. Imagine how many of teams of 2 to 5 scouts can be organized by each district. Arrowmen should be expected to be the outdoor experts because they are trained and experienced in most outdoor skills. Likewise, they should be experts in arranging and planning service activities because they do so much of it. How hard is mowing the lawn of a bed ridden elderly person. And, to me, Arrowmen should always properly wear the field uniform in all their activities. Elite scouts should set an elite example. They shouldn't have to wear the sash or patch to be recognized An Arrowmen. Their actions speak loudly. Their appearance is professional and confident. As I said, the problem I saw with OA lately is the lack of vision from the adults. No real expectations for honor campers and servants. They were just repeating what they always did. OA should be known as training for each units camping expert. Don't worry about the little newby scouts who aren't ready for OA, if the organization has a true reputation of honor, then they will be back. Something like that I guess. Barry

Giving troops something for the older scouts is not a good marketing endorsement for the elite program or Troop Program. Elite implies exceptional. Is just being older an honor? What appeal does a Service/Camping organization have for the average older scout that a troop program could not provide? Seems OA is trying to find itself in a youth organization struggling to become relevant in todays social climate. In a culture of mediocrity, elitism, even in character, might have some resistance. Tomorrows parents will have to find the appeal with an OA program that is acceptable for their kids. Barry

Yes, I was reluctant to use the “f” word (family), but I was also thinking it. Barry

I’m betting National is using some data to show 6 months improves membership. But like most data used by National to make changes, they misinterpret the data. Excepting for girls, the change won’t likely change the final results much. I would expect further changes down the road to make OA more attractive. National will have to rides these changes out until the adults who are used to the traditional program leave. As I tell new SMs, make program changes with the new scouts while appeasing the older scouts. Barry

I agree. But I think the difference is I look at it from the public perspective, not the scout. I mentioned the other day that young parents I've talked to lately feel betrayed by National for bringing in girls in the program because that is not the BSA they envision. It doesn't mater if they have sons or daughters, the BSA represented a higher order of respected tradition. As I said, because of the biological changes mature through as they grow into adults, they are fickle about dress, so there will never be an agreement of a uniform uniform. But the public does have a traditionally respected vision of the BSA. They are who the BSA has to satisfy. When the Canadian Scouts went through their membership change in the 90s, they took a huge membership hit. There are many reasons folks abandoned, what was considered at the time, the best Boy Scout organization in the world. But the one thing that I saw offensive right off was they completely changed the uniform to look nothing like the traditional uniform. I pretty sure they did that on purpose, but I'm guessing that one change alone drove off potential membership. Of course the uniform should be practical and functional, but the image of scouting shouldn't be sacrificed. I have been watching the uniform changes for the last 30 years. Anybody remember the short shorts of the early 90's? The uniform design today is completely different from that uniform, but still easily identifiable as a Boy Scout uniform. And while folks talk about the European uniform of just a neckerchief, I recently say a picture of a European female Scout in full uniform that looked almost identical to the BSA uniform. In fact, it look even better. I didn't have to read the caption to know she was a Scout. Barry

I'm not understanding this fun stuff thing over uniforms. I drive by the soccer fields and see soccer players having fun in "Uniforms". There doesn't seem to be any unrest about youth sports and uniforms. Fun being the only reason youth join Scouts is a myth. In the US, the parents are very much part of the motivation for their kids joining scouting. I have said many times that the unit must satisfy the parents if they want to keep the scouts. Of course scouting looks like fun. But lots of activities look like fun to kids. Today's youth have a lot of choices and and they are fickle. So there has to be some other motivation or push to select scouts over those other temptations. The parents do the pushing and their motivation are the added benefits of values gained from the experience. On our trip to Philmont one year, we stopped at the Santa Fe Arts Festival. As our van was passing the crowds walking to the festival, we could tell by the unusual animal noises that the scouts were noticing several girls also walking that direction. With their tail feathers fanning out, they said they didn't want to wear their uniforms. We were once that age, so we adults said fine, but the adults are wearing theirs. I doubt any adult in that group can remember the art because we were constantly greeted and thanked for giving our time. I hadn't shook that many hands since my wedding. The boys went their way on their prowl, and we went ours. But by coincidence, they ran into us again as we were eating and drinking free concession food from the vendors. Apparently our fortunes were better than theirs. In all our travels, our scouts have been treated special because of the uniform. Only once during a visit at a city zoo up North did we feel uncomfortable. Now, maybe things have changed in the last couple of years, but my experience is the uniform carries a respect with the general public that the wearer may not deserve. The uniform represents more than fun. It represents discipline of practicing virtuous actions. We never got that kind of respect from folks walking by our soccer matches. Scouting is more than just fun and I believe the uniform is part of its heritage. Reducing it to street clothes would discourage all that many more families from joining. Barry

Yes, hopefully. But pragmatically, sometimes a troop of 80 scouts takes what it can get. Even worse are the very limited choices while canoeing on the lakes of Canada. Still, your advice was our guidebook while backpacking in the Rockies. I have to laugh, the expert guidance for walking into sudden thunder mountain shower while backpacking is almost just that: Lay down your pack. Crouch down on the pack with your feet touching together and your head as low as you can get it in such a position. Of course that position is natural for a praying SM.😎 So many young lives with the whole future ahead of them. So much responsibility. Barry

LOL, my two greatest fears while SM was over-reactive parents and lightning. I guess I was lucky in both because most of the over-reactive parents went to the other troop, and while the troop has a lot of tense-filled stories of lightning, the only harm was a car alarm competing with the earth shaking thunder. I guess one can never be too safe, but when the hard rain (five inches in two hours) in the middle of the night is mixed with thunder that sounded like machine gun fire, what is the safest action for 80 scouts. Was our troop just lucky over the years? As I think back to the Bobcat patrol abandoning their camp to run from a tornado, I can't really say. Weather in Oklahoma is challenging for scout units. The rules are clear, but what about the gray area between sleeping in cars to hide from lightning 20 miles away and a beautiful Spring rain shower giving scouts time to play chess in their tent? I don' t know, I don't have an answer, but the answers to my many prayers made me an even more devoted follower of God. Barry

2 weddings, 3 college graduations and 3 grandkids.😳 Barry

Well I can see more training coming. I found, in the couple of troubling adult/scout situations, that adults don't want to push to a point of confrontation. Even if they understand that the council will take it from their report, they would still rather not say anything and hope it goes away. I have personally seen this happen. Barry

Wow Fred, that's perfect. Barry

The problem with EDGE is that adults are taking their young scouts' time to discuss teaching. A recent study showed that more 11 year old scouts were hurt falling out of their chair asleep while listening to adults talk about EDGE than from all woods tools injuries added together. Maybe a little exaggeration. Do we really want 11 year old's know what E-D-G-E means? Does that sound like fun in the woods? No wonder the Handbook is becoming more irrelevant with each new issue? We had a Webelos visit our troop 5 times before joining. It took that long because his mom hated our boy run style troop program. She finally relented, but she was extremely skeptical until she, while sitting out of sight in her tent at summer camp, watched an older scout approach a new scout to offer help him learn first-aid. She was so impressed by the simple words, "What are you doing? Can I help?", that she recruited 30 new scouts for us next year. I'm trying to imagine if she would have been as impressed if the older scout approached the young scout and said, "Can I EDGE you with first-aid?". OK, maybe I'm a little over the top, but I think I'm just thinking the same as quazse. I believe National put EDGE in the Scout Handbook for the adults to learn, not the scouts. If a scout wants to teach a skill, they will naturally in their own way, get the information across. That being said, I think EDGE should be taught at NYLT. After all, NYLT is course for advanced skills. And if the older scouts want to pass the information down to the younger scouts, all that much better. But when a new scout walks through the door, the SM shouldn't have to say "come young scout, I want to take you away from your patrol so we can talk about EDGE.". Barry

I think it's an age thing. I found that most scouts didn't really care until about 15. Barry

In all my discussions of BSA's ills, Dale is never mentioned by these parents. Do you have a theory, guess? Of course you are also very pro girls in the BSA and that doesn't fit with these parents either. Maybe just local. Barry

This is interesting. I'm going to go out on a limb, but none of what you say is valid around here. I understand everything is local, but recently when folks learned of my scouting experience, they have a few quick comments about where the program is going. Many, if not most, of these folks are parents with young kids. Many are mothers. I have never heard anybody mention the Dale case. I would be very surprised if any parent of scout age youth today have any recollection of it. I just haven't heard Dale mentioned in several years by anyone. These parents do have recollection of the gay membership change, but it is so over shadowed by the induction of girls, there isn't any discussion about it. There really isn't even much discussion of the girls, except to say the BSA isn't the BSA anymore. Many of them ask me what the BSA is even called today, however, their body language confesses they don't really care. Parents who have scouts presently in the program today seem willing to continue with the program, even excited. In fact, they aren't discouraged much, if at all, by the girls. It's the young parents who haven't got there yet that feel the program is gone as far as their concerned, and imply to me that it's not in their future. Now, of course their minds can be changed depending marketing, but in general, most parents have moved on, and are looking to other programs for their kids future. When I mention the sex abuse scandal, I'm quite surprised to learn it's not a big deal. The reaction is the same for parents in the program as well as the parents not there yet. When I say it could have dramatic effects to the program, they all shrug their shoulders. The don't care, and the discussion has nowhere to go. I'm perplexed. I don't have any explanation for the responses of the abuse scandal. My only guess is that our culture is so inundated with scandals in the media that people are used to waiting out the end to see what is real. I don't know. Weird. But, in all these discussions, admitting girls far far outweighs the abuse scandal, or any scandal, for swaying outside general public opinion of the program. I'm pleasantly surprised to learn that the Boy Scouts Of America image is still very powerful with today's young parents. But it is bitter sweet, they seem to feel betrayed. Barry

And then there is the scout who ran away from home to go to summer camp. Long story. Barry

I'm not sure I should respond in this discussion because the easy answer is hard. But I want to respond this this part about homesickness. We found that preparing the parents did indeed help the majority of our homesickness. What I personally believe is the parents are the ones who are homesick. For most scouts, the first summer camp is the first time the parents are separated from their kids for more than 1 night. They respond by telling their kids "I can't wait until you get back", or "when you get back, we will have fun doing this or that". Their kids are being programmed that being away from their parents is a "temporary must" that is bad for them. So, we sit down and work with the parents to start encouraging the kids to look at the adventure side and the fun activities. That the week will be short and packed with a lot of great memories. Then for the parents therapy, writes letters of how they are excited to hear stories of the fun, so have as much fun as they can get. Don't say how they miss them or that even the dog misses them. I feel that most kids go through some homesickness because their routine is changed so much for such a long period time. But, summer camps keep kids pretty busy, so they don't have much time to harp on it. And if the parents are excited for them, well, all the much better. Yes, preparing the parents a few weeks before summer camp helps a lot. That being said, there are now and then those chronic homesickenss scouts that nothing seems to help. Usually, there is something else behind the situation. Most often for us was divorce and the fear of separation. In most cases, the parent sees it coming and warns the troop. And in most cases, absolutely nothing helps. In the end, the parents came to pick those scouts. I think two in my experience. HOWEVER, I want to warn that other causes might be in order. I give the one example of the scout during our summer camp in Colorado. This is one of those scouts that absolutely loves camping and has a very supportive family. So he was a big surprise. He was so depressed that suicide came up in the discussion. But, on our way home from camp, as we descended below 5000 ft (camp was around 8000 ft.) the scout came alive. He was all of a sudden his chatty self and excited for the rafting activity we were doing on our way home. He, was a complete opposite of what he was the day before. We later discussed this with doctors and they certainly believe the scout was suffering from altitude sickness. After that, we prepared for altitude sickness future high adventure activities. I can count two that we encountered on backpacking trips. One at Philmont. It's amazing to witness because getting to a lower altitude fixes the problem. Barry

Same issue with cattle at Philmont. Barry

History shows that it will have a negative effect. I can't take greed out of National, but I believe there are ways to give them what they want and still build a manageable program. Create a program completely separate and independent of the other BSA program designed specifically for the youth of that maturity. No reference at all to the Pack. Then, National could recruit any toddler up to age 6. The structure would be more of a once or twice a month go and see. It could have some arts and crafts I guess, but it needs to be specific for parents looking for opportunities to spend enjoyable time with their toddlers. The program needs to be structure giving parents choices that fit their personal time. We could call this completely separate independent program, ummm, Tigers? I think it will work because this is what we did with our Tiger program and our Tiger Drop out rate went from 50% to 5%. Barry

Personally, I believe the program should tailored around the average parent, not pack size. The average parent works, so family time is limited. I found the average mother doesn't enjoy spending the day outdoors cooking and tying knots while bugs are buzzing around while her sweating head in the full heat of the day, or shivering from the cold. So, when the Bear leader mom who has been planning meetings that turns into one hour of herding cats three times a month for the last three years looks at the Webelos handbook, there is some hesitation. The average father of kids this age works more than 40 hours, which leaves little time to plan activities each week for a bunch of boys with the energy of the Energizer Bunny. Just about all Tigers can't read or write and haven't learned the discipline of sitting for 15 minutes. And yet National expects the average CM to pop out an hour of wonderful memories even though they don't have the life experience of planning a pack meeting full of songs, skits, and general fun for boys (and girls) covering the ages from thumb suckers to pre-teens. Like troops, unit size generally shapes to the ability of the leaders. That will never change. But, National could shape a program that fits better around the daily life of the average parent. Personally, I have never understood the reasoning of recruiting youth who are too young to dream of adventure and lack the understanding of patience. Second grade is when boys start to see the world from reading books. Second grade is also the youngest age for youth to understand the discipline of waiting, and at least grasp the discipline of respecting another persons time. As I said, if National wants to keep sons and daughter in the scouting program, they have to build a program for the parents of today. Barry

Lots of interesting stuff here. Before the big Tiger changes in the year 2000, the membership numbers showed just over 50% of the Webelos nott crossing over. The Tiger changes in 2000 were substantial enough that we predicted a noticeable troop membership drop in 2005/6. And that did happen. We didn't have any predictions on the Wolf/Bear or Webelos dropouts because we didn't see any reasoning for it. I heard later from someone close to National that the wolf/bear/webelos I dropout rates had also increased. Makes sense the Web II crossover numbers were adjusted as a result. We figured the Tigers would have a higher dropout rate (more time required from the parents), but I still don't understand the dropout rise in the other ages. I could only guess burnout eventually caught up to the parents faster as a result of the more demanding Tiger program. Actually the 50% drop out rate is really higher, but the difference doesn't count in crossovers, it counts in first year scouts. Many scouts, for whatever reason, register with a troop, but never show up. That registration stays on the books for a year. Which is interesting because first year Boy Scouts has the highest dropout rate of all the ages in the BSA. I don't believe difference has much of a bump on the first year scout dropout rate, but there is not data to verify it. Barry

You are right that the Bear year is the burnout year. That is the hump year of either making or breaking the den to succeed. Experts say that the average person gives 20 months of volunteer service willingly. After that? Well after that the volunteer requires support. Your pack is very much like my pack, support is provided. But, I don't think you realize how few pack are this organized. They are good at planning a head and they aren't very good recruiters. Most of them push the same leader to complete the 5 year tenure. They don't seek out a substitute. The leader nobly continues, but the effort lacks the enthusiasm for a fun program. Some find find a substitute, but with much reluctance and they drag the scouts to the finish. We had one den of 12 Webelos join our pack where the parents finished the two Webelos years by taking turns. Not one of them was the official leader, they just took turns to get the boys through. As good as it sounds, it wasn't a fun den. They had fun in our troop. If you look at the volunteering required just for the Tigers, you will find it to be about a forth of the pack volunteers. And many packs look to the new Tiger parents to fill leadership roles with the thinking that the sooner they get started, the more enthusiastic they will be. But, I find that first grader parents are reluctant because they are being hit with everything that first year: First year of school, first year of Sunday school, sports, dance, piano, karate, and Cub Scouts. I will never forget the very tired looking parent who came to recruiting night holding his thumb-sucking son .In our culture, the first year of elementary education is a huge maturing year for both the parents and kids. Night and day difference from the 2nd grade. Someone asked why Webelos is such a dropout year. It's the year where parents draw the line and make their kids finish what they started. Webelos II is the end of starting with Cub Scouts. I was told a few years ago that National is also seeing more drops at the Webelos I and Bear years now. I don't know. You've heard me say this many times, kids go with their parents. If you want happy scouts, make happy parents. That is what we did. Barry

The problem Tigers caused was requiring more volunteer time to an already heavily burdened volunteer program. I don't know the numbers now, but 20 years ago only half of the graduating Webelos continued to the next step of scouting, troops. I believe that 70% of those Webelos can blame their boring experience to adult leader burnout. It's too much, and now they have a Lion program. Barry

The tone of National for the last couple of years is chaos. I'm guessing girl membership change has everyone at National trying to catch up. The 2018 publish has likely been planned for several years, so putting it out on time was just easier than holding it back. What a great idea. Would a SM require much more in their handbook? Barry

I whole heartedly agree. In their ignorance of day to day character growth, these folks couldn't see the organizations real success. So, they made changes for a path of bigger indicators of success, numbers. I guess National's lesser view of outdoors and adventure in the 70s highlighted their arrogance of the traditional program value. But, the new Tiger program in the 1980s highlighted their greed. IMHO, the added burden of toddlers to an already full program teetered the scales negatively all they way to Venturing. The aged based new scout patrols have done a lot of damage to the tradition of Patrol Method, which is the heart of the BSA. But, I feel the harm from the additional burden of Tigers overshadows the shift away from traditional patrols. I believe the damage from aged based patrols would have eventually caught up with the program, but overburdened Pack program drove organization numbers down so much that National has became reactionary to the trend. And here we are. Barry