Eagledad

No, what I mean is the logistics for the summer camp to handle food from delivery, dividing it out to patrols and transporting it to the troops is very complicated and time consuming. It requires a lot more staff hours. One little hic-up and the whole camp is set back. Been there done that. As I said, going to a mess hall reduces cost by a lot because it requires less staff and is easier on camp logistics. Barry

Logistics for patrol cooking summer camps is a lot more complicated than mess halls, which I understand is the main reason many camps we're glad to get away from it. Barry

Hmm, not in our dinning halls. Scouts are encouraged to get in and GET OUT to make room for the rest of the camp. My experience is that cooking is the most stressful activity for patrols because of the conflict of teamwork. As a result, patrol cooking is also where the most bonding occurs, as well as the most behavior growth from dealing with the conflict. The disadvantage is patrol cooking takes twice as long as dinning halls, so scouts have less time for other activities. Barry

Pretty good, Parkman. While the CC may have the final authority, final approval of the scouts' plan would be unusual. Parkman's explanation is accurate, but doesn't quite explain reality. The CC should be the final authority based from the SM's bad choices, not the scouts'. The distance between the PLC and the CC is wide because the scouts need room to fail. The SM is the mentor for the PLC and requires enough space for the scouts to learn if their original choices and decisions won't work. When other adults start pulling their authority card to instruct the scouts they made bad decisions, then they are undermining the relationship between the scouts and adults. It's simple and complicated at the same time. But if the scouts start making decisions based from trying to keep adults off their back, then the growth from the experience of improving behavior and decision processes is limited. It is said scouting is a safe place. As for the CO, it is their program. But they should understand the process of the PLC making making plans and learning from their effort of putting the plan together. If the CO has to check on the Scouts, then that CO doesn't want a boy run program where the scouts learn by failing. And their are CO's like that. Barry

One of my past Webelos was telling me at his ECOH that one of his most memorable Webelos meetings was learning how to safety operate a lawn mower. Only one of the 16 Webelos had mowed a lawn at the point of their life. Just starting it was a thrill he never forgot. Barry

Yes, but in general these things are discussed by adults for adult expectations, not as pre-expected actions for the scouts. In other words, adults completely ignore the Aims and Methods are discussed as the Aims. Badon Powell once talked about adults spending too much time on Drill and Parade. Example; who is really responsible for the expectation of wearing the uniform in most troops? For the adults, how the scouts look is the Aim, not the Aim of Character from the decision for wearing the uniform. My point of the Eagle is that it is a metaphor for how the image of scouting has changed from scout driven program to adult expectations. I taught in my training courses that "boy run" (patrol method) is more difficult than "adult run" because "boy run" requires that adults mentor each scout individually for their choices. Far easier to instruct the group of the right choice before they are released to make choices, than to mentor each individual after the experience of their choice. Since most parents are by nature self-serving to their kids needs, a program change would have to come from an authority (National). Barry

I just now saw this. To be honest, I don't remember if that scouts action was more representative of the scout's character, or the troop culture. But, the way I encouraged that type of action by scouts was initiating it through the PLC and acknowledging the actions through the whole troop. I called it a servant lifestyle to adults, but team work to the scouts. I impressed on them that when they saw another youth leader on the PLC struggling, walk over and offer help. What started me that way was the PLs struggle to deal with misbehaved scouts. We had several approaches, basically asking the misbehaved scout to leave the area. But, we also encouraged other youth leaders nearby to offer help. We also taught servant leadership as basically serving each member of the patrol. Get involved with their scouts and provide support if they show a need. The actions of leading by serving is a slow learned process because it's such difference of definition for leadership. In truth, it's giving the PL (and rest of the officers) permission to get more personal and offer their support. It starts with little actions like jumping in and helping with cooking or kp if the tasks are going slow. Asking their scouts if they brought rain gear or extra socks. The small actions leads to more intentional offering their support and assistance. Some of us humans are better than others at serving others. But, if we initiate the idea of it and support the actions, everybody will eventually became part of the culture in some part, even if the part is small. Barry

Wow, that's pretty good. Over the years, I have come to believe that the parents' are the driving force for youth joining the BSA in this generation of our culture. So, I don't think scouts are the main audience, from a marketing standing. I laugh a little thinking back of how I had to change my sells pitch with Webelos and their parents. We learned over time that to sell the Webelos, we sent them off with the patrols so they could experience a typical patrol experience. Sometimes that could be bad. We brought the SPL to talk to the parents about his troop and answer questions. That impressed the parents somewhat. Then the SM gets a few minutes to explain more of the meat of the program; camp outs, meetings, goals for their sons, and so forth. More often than not, when the SM asked for questions, the lead question was "how long before their son gets Eagle?". I don't know if the Eagle turned into the main reason for joining is the result of BSA marketing, or if the BSA markets the Eagle because they found it is the focus of parents. I still remember the long frustrating discussion with qwazse using his daughter as the example of girls getting the Eagle. To be fair, qwazse has also said that the Eagle was not the reason his daughter was in scouts, and anyone who knows him knows that he doesn't believe the Eagle is the main reason for scouting. I look back at the discussion and realize we were both coming from different perspectives. But that was a long passionate discussion among traditional scouters on this forum. Eagle, the bane (annoyance) of our existence. The Eagle is symbolic for the quandary your talking about. How can we appeal to the instinctive desires of the youth if we keep marketing to the selfish desires of the parents? Where I think you are missing in your post is that the adults don't spend enough time discussing Aims and goals. They don't understand how the intended structure works. So, they are locked in on the methods. Most parents today don't understand how the basic purity of Aims and Methods naturally work in the ultimate goal of making moral and ethical decisions. Parents aren't being shown how their kids character is developed by the continued actions of taking responsibility for their decisions. They only hear about the methods (or the method of advancement) as the goal, which is supposed to be the responsibility of the scouts. How can a parent see how the continued practice of taking responsibility for their decisions is the real virtue of opportunity in scouting. Not the pinnacle award that theoretically represents that effort? The program is stuck in the mud of the Eagle. As long as National believes that stature is the driving force for membership, the traditionalist and purist will have enfluence on the meat of the program. I have often said that the program lost it's soul when the respect of the First Class rank was replaced by the stature of the Eagle rank. That will have to change for there to be any hope of enabling the youth to control their experience in scouting. Barry

Great replies all. I will add my 2 cents because my ego requires some attention....😎 Elitts explains it very well here. Additionally the SM should strive to never get to a veto, but instead guide the decision process to where the scouts eventually come to a the conclusion that the SM would agree. Veto is generally only used by lesser experienced troops. Generally when either or both the SM and Scouts haven't developed the skills for scouts making complex independent decisions. What I learned is that as the SM gets better at scoutmasting, and the scouts get better with the process of making independent decisions, vetos eventually go away. That is the goal. Personally I find any envolvment for planning scout activities from the committee can make the process clumsy and time consuming. But that may be because we were a big troop with lots of adult resources at the ASM level. And, I believe the role of the main role of the CC is to ensure the program is going the direction of the CO's vision. CC is quality control of the SM's methods for working toward the vision. I have never been a fan of the idea that adults are the safety check valve for the scouts. Why can't the scouts learn to do that? Adults are accustom to being the check valve for safety and judge of ideas based from their life experiences as parents. What they have to learn to do is think of themselves as resources for the scouts. Some parts of planning just may require an adult, so the adult needs to see themselves a providing a service to the scouts. Adults tend to judge scouts ideas, and that is dangerous because I have watched scouts loose their enthusiasm for ideas simply from an adult interjecting a differing opinion. I have also seen scouts plan amazing trips even while the adults felt the scouts bit off more than they could chew. Trips to Alaska and Montana come to mind. The scouts made it happen even though the adults doubted their plan. If the CC feels they need to be part of the approval, then as qwazse points out, they are part of the team and a resource. Not the judge or check valve to say no. The scouts should learn and get the chance to become the check valve based from the resource information provided to them. We taught this process at NYLT (JLTC). And it's fun to watch once everyone understands their roles. Scouts can do amazing things that adults don't even imagine. Barry

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