fred8033

... sadly ... until about a year ago ... I could have answered. I had old versions of the Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures from before 2000 that I inherited. I also had the ACPP versions I started using in the mid 2000s. ... happily ... I have more of my house back. Really wasted a lot of space keeping old documents / books that I'd be purging in ten / twenty years when I move again. I'd rather have the clean house now. From what I understood, the MB program was never a troop program and has always been overseen by council / district. Scouts have always been open to use any MB counselor. The gray area was how much say the SM had in the scout starting the MB and who they could use. ... FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND ... and I could be wrong ... the intention has always been SM awareness and not SM control. ... Now, units could have done things differently themselves. But BSA's intention has been fairly clear.

That's great !!! From what I'm hearing this is all administrative stuff adults should resolve. It's not a scout issue. If you want to be helpful, you could provide supporting place the SM could use. But at some point, the SM should say "I trust you and it looks good."

Did each merit badge start with a conversation between the scout and his SM ? ... email, phone call, socially distant in-person ? Every MB starts with the scout letting his SM know .... "Mr SM. I'm going to be joining this MB session in another council to do this MB ...." ..., then I'd hope the SM would make it easy for him. That's explicit in the BSA Guide To Advancement and the scout's blue card. It's not about the SM approving the MB situation. It's about the SM being aware of what's happening. SMs want to be aware as advancement growth is not about the number of MBs a scout. Growth is about the process the scout has to do to earn the MBs. Phone calls. Efforts. Doing it himself. Scouting owning the responsibility. ... Too often the MB venue or (and my apologies here) the parents subvert the MB program. And scouts often subvert the program naively (and sometimes not-naively) claiming a MB is done. Scout failing to let his SM know about pending MBs is not a blocking point. But it can raise questions and concerns. So my questions are #1 Is the SM questioning the MBs ? #2 Was the SM aware of the scout working the MBs before?

Nicely stated. I've been a scout leader for 15+ years and I'd definitely be challenged to keep any cub den running. It's ALOT of work and confusing to understand if you are doing it "RIGHT". I think that's why so many adults are relieved to cross into troops ... if they make it that far. ... But then troops have a different issue.

So true. Scouting is hung up in political and legal battles that are tearing the program apart. Maybe it is time to let the scouting program shrink. Too much contention. Too many arguments. Too much confusion on what scouting really is. It should never be about who is allowed or not allowed to be a scout. Or specific beliefs to be a scout. The test is about people living the scout oath and law in an outdoor oriented program that develops character. Of course, the personal beliefs are important and scouts should be able to find a unit that has compatible set of people. I really believe scouting would be best served right now by focusing on the basics. Outdoors. Camping. Skills. Fellowship in the outdoors while camping and developing skills.

We live in sad times. It is the worst of closed minded intolerance to destroy art, statues and rename the past. In no way does enjoying art or remembering the past exist as a modern statement advocating for returning to the past. In no way does hiding the past promote enlightenment. Each time I see something like this I think about the Buddhas of Bamyan that were destroyed. I think of book burning. I think of hate and intolerance. Baden Powell was not perfect. He was a man of his times who did extraordinary things. If he isn't worthy of a statue, no one is.

It promotes an unhealthy US vs THEM attitude. I live in a city where there are probably 10+ troops within 10 minute drive. It is wholly natural for parents / adults to adopt "that's our feeder pack" attitude. Then, another troop learns and improves recruiting and starts succeeding recruiting from them. So then hard feelings develop, etc. It's a hard hard pattern that I've been on both ends of. Then while one unit is good with recruiting, that unit grows to 50+/60+ scouts and the other crashes to 15/20. And, the pendulum shifts. I entirely believe the correct approach would be umbrella based (charter or org or ...). The committee serves that umbrella group and has a CM, SM, OA advisor and committees for cub camping, troop camping, etc. Different ages help each other. For example, our boy scouts always enjoyed running pinewood derbies, especially if we bribed them with post-derby activities / movie / bowling / ??? They took pride in the derby stuff and enjoyed fellowship with other scouts. Same with cub camping. Our scouts enjoyed cooking etc. I believe emphasizing a transition causes divides. Age based divides. Unit based divides. US vs THEM divides. It's wholly unhealthy. Scouts should always be welcome to shift or change at any time. AND, we should make that easy easy to happen as possible. But encouraging shopping is just not good.

Perhaps we are circling the same issue. Which came first? Chicken or the egg? "THROUGH THE METHOD OF OUTDOORS". This is where scouting shines. ... and it supports as a by-product character / leadership. It's just that I really don't scouting adult leaders do a good job of "explicitly" teaching leadership. BUT, on average they quickly learn to teach out to setup a tent, tie knots, cook in the rain, etc. Scouting shines when we focus first on outdoor adventures. Scouts crashes and burns when we focus first on telling adults to teach leadership and character.

Your thoughts are dead on right ... though I don't express it the same way. My youngest son recently said he loves the camping and activities, but he wishes he could do it more outside of scouting as he doesn't like the scouting aspect. He comes from a scouting experience of way too many adults inserting themselves way way too much. And it's adults that often just don't have the skill to teach what they are preaching. And, adults that trip and fall over each other. It just drives kids away. Memory ... I experienced more than one summer camp where the troop leaderships were proud of how many adults attended. 12 to 15 adults for a troop of approx 20 to 25 scouts. Adults was assigned roles and jobs to make sure camp went smooth. Perhaps I was off base, but I considered this bad. For a 20 to 25 scout summer camp, the perfect number of adults is 2 to 4. Three was bad. Two is good for cribbage. Four is good for hearts. Three allows one adult to nap while playing cribbage.

The above graph 100% matches my experience. I challenge the ability to separate the 1st (camping) and 2nd (time with friends). Many scouts see camping as fun because they hang with their friends away from the normal world / adults / homework / etc. They get to create their own world that they control ... until the next big thunderstorm.

We so so so need more of this in scouting. ... A little bit of good humor and taking things not as serious goes a long way.

I swear I'm just too tired. I kept reading catheter.

"BSA already knows the answer to that one too. It just lacks the will to impose the necessary standards and practices" ... "BSA lacks the will here to impose discipline and direction on a loosey-goosey program" I agree in scouting is often a loosey-goosey program. BSA lack's the will I disagree in that BSA does not know the answer to provide consistent quality. BSA does not know the program they want to be. JROTC? Outward bound? STEM? Career? Or, is it just all-things-to-all-people. BSA depends too much on charismatic, high quality leaders as the answer to the program. BUT, they can't consistently get those high quality leaders. In some ways, maybe the future is good. BSA needs to slim down and decide what type of program it is. BSA needs to trim off all the side programs and focus on the core. It's just that BSA does not really know what that core is. Perhaps, BSA should just use the 1910's handbook.

I was thinking about this the other night. I strongly argue that most adult BSA volunteers share their time because they like being outdoors, in camps, at camp fires, on a river, hiking, etc. But, we want kids to be in it to learn leadership and character. I think that's a bit hypocritical. I strongly believe scouting shines when we are more like a camping club. Friends planning meals. Friends helping setup tents. Friends starting a camp fire and singing songs. Friends planning their next adventure. Oh, as a side benefit, they learn naturally learn leadership and character and develop physical fitness hobbies. So, I'm 100% fine with saying scouts learn leadership, etc, etc, etc. But stop trying to teach it. Scouts learn better when we stop trying to teach.

I agree that we must keep a stiff upper lip, but this is wholly unfair. BSA has been a huge net positive. BSA had a youth protection program in place years before others. BSA did the best to track and remove violators before society and police had similar structures. BSA is being uniquely targeted because of assets without parallel targeting of structures with similar assets that had arguably statistically similar abuse history: schools. sports. and almost every single youth serving organization. BSA is being targeted using 2020 standards / expectations / judgement that were not existing for 1970s / 1980s. BSA's huge mistake was not purging records that were decades old and of zero value / use to BSA before any hint of lawsuits happened. Every company I've worked established in the 1990s document retention policies, in large part due to liability risk. I think it's negligent BSA's legal team did not address this long, long ago. We must meet this as scouts, but I will never accept this as an acceptable penalty. This is a money grab. This is a smear campaign. Shame on the law firms. Shame on the individuals. Shame on the legal system that is blind to this.

Our council canceled all camp weeks before July 5th. Camps are still waiting state/fed guidance to host summer camp. So, I'm interpreting our council communication as NOT a plan to open July 5th. Rather, it's canceling the first several weeks that are too imminent. I'm still betting our later week is canceled too.

Original title was ... "What If - All High Adventure Camps Cancel" My real concern is where we are heading. Sort of on-plan. Lots of adjustments. Nothing solid. Lots of questions. Huge possibilities of things changing week to week. Having to daily / weekly re-confirm with parents / scouts / camps / travel / airlines, etc. Having to collect money from parents out-of-work, laid-off, at-risk, etc? Having to deal with families that are flip-flopping with good justification. I've coordinated several big cost high adventures. It's stressful. It's lots of money. It's having to commit money at the right time. It's having to send regular well-written communications. I'd hate to have the role right now. It was hard enough when our country was functioning smoothly. Even more, I'd hate to be the paid staffers making the decisions about these camps. When to commit money? When to place the food orders? When to tell the staffers to come to work to prepare camp?

I was not viewing it as a scout camping event. Truly just family camping. And, I'd pay our council for the privilege of using the camp site. I'm sure they would accept the donation. It's a bridge until his troop gets back up and running. And a little selfish for myself. I've been driving to that summer camp at least two or three times a year since 2004. Probably a 1000 miles driving each year to that one camp. I'd really hate to miss it this year. ... So ... any excuse to get up to camp ... Ideally, my son with his scouts and his friends. But if that can't happen, maybe we can do a non-scout outing.

That's great. I'd contribute a lot of our summer camp funds to allow my son and I to camp in our traditional camp spot even if just for one or two nights overnight. Absolutely great idea. Heck, I'd make it a family camp for those in my house. What a great idea. We wouldn't even need to leave the camp site much because it's big enough.

"local area" ... I always love vague terms. What is local? I'm assuming a "state" is not "local". I'd agree a neighborhood is "local". Probably also a city. Maybe a county. Our council is large (many counties) and our troop camps are all outside our council area or even outside the state. I'd argue none of our summer camps can meet the expectation of "local". Question ... Am I the only one tripping and falling over the title "Scouts BSA"? It's easy to say Cub Scout camps. Or Venturing activities. Or Sea Scouts. But when I say "Scouts BSA" I feel I always need to include a reference to "troops" to avoid confusion on whether I mean the larger organization or the 11-17 year old program. I feel like we are looking at another program rename / restructuring within the next several years to solve the confusion.

Social distance? Scouts can't keep their hands off each. Pushing. Shoving. Sharing a chair. Trading gear. Playing games. It is 100% unrealistic to think you can have 6 to 8 scouts who are 11 to 15 years old stay six part away from each other for multiple days. I doubt if you could succeed for 15 minutes. Each scout would have to be driven by their own parent Each scout would need his own space. Each scout would need his own tent, chair, table, rain tarp, stove, plan, cooking supplies, wash basin Each scout would need his own bathroom or shovel to dig ... so much for leave no trace. Each scout need to wear a mask the whole weekend. Assume 5 to 10 masks per scout. Once bathrooms, tables, water spigots, door handles, etc are involved, you just can't avoid cross contaminating. As s leader, I do not take responsibility for setting up tents, cooking, running the camp outs or much else. But I do have a large responsibility for safety. There is no way I could honestly say I could succeed with socially distance from their own patrol mates. One of the proudest traditions in our troop is that we encourage scouts to help each other setup tents. When you are done with yours, help the next guy. ... There is no way we could still do that and have socially distancing.

Agreed. From what I see, this is a family camping / hiking summer.

For camping, I'd fully align with council direction. I'd fear beyond normal personal liability if my troop camped while our council cancels their own. I'd only support unit camping if the council explicitly says units can resume their own camping. It's not just personal liability. We are talking real risk. Plus, I'd be tormented forever if I was the leader that ends up with sick kids and sick adults after being told the council is canceling their own camps.

Tech related eagle projects can be difficult for Eagle candidates to keep control of planning, developing and leading. It really depends on the tech project, but many of these projects require special skill and do not lend cleanly out to leading by a non-tech expert. Scouts become too dependent on individual adults with special skills to plan and organize. Also, scouts often become too dependent on individual adults to invest many hours. I've seen too many scouts that loose control of their project because the nature of the work just doesn't lend to the scout leading the project. I fear many tech projects fall into that pattern.

I keep flip-flopping. I celebrate finding a way to keep scouts involved in scouting. I celebrate finding a way to distract scouts during this stressful time. On the flip side, virtual camp outs are just not the same thing. I have a real hard time figuring where to position on this. Is it possible we will end up with Eagle scouts who only camped in their own back yard ? But then again, maybe that is an acceptable reflection of today.