fred8033

Keep it simple. One method, ask the year they were born. If two or less different, fine. If more than two, see if it's a minor difference such as Dec 2016 to Jan 2019. Another method is that everyone brings a single person tent. Our troop doesn't worry about this much as they camp by patrol and the patrols are close in age as they were formed when the scouts joined. Scouts move around, but it's easy to track one or two situations versus the whole troop. I should note this our troop always watched the age of scouts sharing a tent (or at least for the last sixteen years). We viewed big age differences as a power differential. If an eleven year old had to go somewhere, then two sixteen / seventeen scouts would go. Not one. We always tried to keep tent partners closer in age. But then again, it's more a power issue and maturity issue.

Ours too. And it can sit in the rain without warping and keeps everything dry inside. Biggest benefit is the smallest scout can carry it.

The lawyer in that article is a well known ambulance chaser. He's chasing money. He stirs the pot looking for victims from decades ago causing people of today to be damaged. I've seen no good in what he does.

If that is what you need to make a meaningful MB experience, then I agree. Others might with help be able to do something else and make it meaningful.

If MBUs were the only way, then yes I'd be against. I'm okay with MBUs if there is a distribution of different MB opportunities. Some where the scout reached out to the counselor and drove it. Some where the troop ran a MB session Some where they are done at summer camp Some where it's a MB university. Some where the scout has a family member who's an expert or able to cover it. In my mind, every MB opportunity needs to bring something to the table. I've seen PhD Oceanographers and Navy submarine captains jointly teach Oceanography at a MBU. Cool. I've seen medical doctors teach at MBUs. Cool. I've seen PhD chemists with some "unique" experiences teach chemistry. It really depends on what is brought to the table. If it's death by power point or a generic person so scouts can complete a MB, then I want my scouts out of there. It's just worth a patch at the cost of their enthusiasm, trust and time. If we waste scouts time too often, then scouts will not see the program as valuable. But if MBCs do something cool, then scouts will be glad they were there. I remember at college years ago. One of my best ever classes had 1,000 people in it. The teacher was outstanding and there were 1,000 people in it because the teacher was outstanding. IMHO, numbers and ratios of scouts to MBCs do not define the issue at all.

I really meant this thread to be discussion on the assertion that we could eliminate the Eagle application. It's just not needed anymore. But ... you wrote "no text in the G2A showed hat it had to be completed and so we deemed it optional". I fear this is a stretch interpretation. The G2A flexibility is dealing with scouts that don't follow the required process and go off on a tangent. My interpretation is your district is using the BSA G2A remedy for a Eagle application defective situation as your district normal. (defective in that the scout does not submit a project workbook with signatures on the proposal and report). BSA does say ... BSA GTA 9.0.1.2 Prepare the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook ... "The most current workbook must be used. It can be found at www.scouting.org/advancement. The workbook shows the project proposal was approved ahead of time, and then properly accepted by all parties when finished." BSA 9.0.1.3 Complete the Application ... "Pay special attention to the following red-flag items. .... 6. Attachments: Service project workbook" BSA 9.0.2.0 The Eagle Scout Service Project ... "You must use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook, BSA publication No. 512-927, in meeting this requirement." BSA GTA 9.0.2.8 Use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook ... "While the use of the workbook is required" BSA GTA 9.0.2.8 Use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook ... call out on page 70 ... "The requirement that Scouts use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook means they must use the official document as produced by the Boy Scouts of America. Although it is acceptable to copy and distribute it, and even to transfer it to a different software platform or operating system, it must maintain the same appearance. No council, district, unit, or individual has the authority to require additional forms, or to add or change requirements, or to make any additions, deletions, or changes in the text, outlines, graphics, or other layout or informational elements of the workbook" I really don't think BSA could write it any more clear that the workbook is required. Not using it is a defective situation that BSA has provided remedies for supporting the scout. Now the scout can hand in a blank Eagle workbook except the signatures. The signatures are REQUIRED to prove the proposal was done before the project and the report signatures mean the project fulfilled commitments.

I'm sad when I see that happen. Our current EBOR chair does a great job as keeping the focus on getting to know the scout. It's great to see that. I have seen previous EBORs have the wrong tone that really alienated people.

I don't view the PDF workbook as a preparation for the real world. I view it as a constraint to control previous paperwork process abuses. Though it has hoops, the three page proposal s about as short as I've seen. The plan and report are pretty short too. The key point is the workbook is not the learning objective. The key is that the developing, planning and leading a project is the requirement. The paperwork is an enabler to the process, but not the requirement itself or even the core learning objective. I'd agree that an online system would be better. I'd be glad if we could upgrade. But still I'm happy with what we have. It's way better than the pre-2011 situation. And this PDF in a printed version could still be available for those scouts not fully online ... which is amazingly not as rare I I thought it would be.

I wasn't trying to comment on the project workbook. There's lots of good and bad in any choice. I'm glad to have the workbook constrains the hoops scouts have to jump. The past had too many paperwork abuses. Plus, the workbook is hardly a waterfall structure. It more just solicits the basic questions that come with any project.

In our council, the eagle app is dropped off at the council office. Then it's triage by council staff (who are experts in the process and very supportive ... but it takes time). Then it's sent to the district via mail or district picks up. At that point, two to three weeks have elapsed. Then EBOR is considered for scheduling. Sometimes it's a week. Most of the time it's another several weeks. The average to EBOR done right now is eight to nine weeks. I'd be supportive if we could directly deliver the Eagle apps to the district advancement chairs. That would save at least two weeks of the processing. But then again, it seems like it could be expedited even more ... drastically more.

I'm not quoting anything at all about the EBOR. I'm saying the backend paperwork done by unit, district and council should be expedited. Currently, it takes way too long and there are too many people touching the application with no value added. The EBOR should continue as now. If anything, the scout could take more responsibility for his EBOR by bringing his presentation materials with him into the EBOR. Thus, making it more his EBOR that he actively drives than an EBOR that he just sits through.

I agree. When I look at the individual advancement report, it's already there. It shows the dates for each eagle requirement, etc. It evaluates whether the records indicate the scout completed each of the requirements. Here is what I think is needed. Manual step still ... A "Ready for EBOR" review queue and screen .... Council staff would have access to unit data and an ability to push "approved for Eagle board of review". That approval should automatically email the contacts setup for in the troop (scoutmaster, committee chair, advancement admin), scout family (mom, dad, scout) and district advancement staff (district advancement chair, and other members). That review could essentially check that each of the Eagle rank requirements were approved by unit leadership. Automated ... "100% automated paperwork review" ... Once the last Eagle requirement before EBOR was approved by unit leaders, the system could automatically notify a new scout is ready for his EBOR. Supporting materials ... For now, the scout could bring supporting materials to his EBOR ... project workbook, pictures, diagrams, timesheets, other .... The scoutmaster or other unit leader sitting in the EBOR could bring the reference letters and other non-scout-materials. Long term, maybe a file repository could be created where we upload the project workbook, images and other related paperwork. It seems like this could happen fairly quick. What I'm seeing is council staff is spending at least $25 or more per application to process an Eagle app. ... plus postage. Then add many weeks of delays as things bounce between people or wait for a human to do what is already done automatically in ScoutBook. I think this 9 to 11 week turn-around could be reduced to 21 to 3 weeks.

While doing advancement at the district and council level, I've met many wonderful scouters, both professional and volunteer. These scouters are dedicated and do an outstanding job. With that said, I suspect our council is fairly common about processing Eagle paperwork. From the time the scout gives his application to his scoutmaster, and the scoutmaster drives it into the council office ... and then it gets reviewed by the council ... and then it is sent to the EBOR ... and the EBOR is scheduled ... and the EBOR occurs ... and the paperwork is returned to the council ... and the scout receives confirmation that national has approved his Eagle rank ... it takes between 9 to 12 weeks. By far the biggest delay is shuffling paper around and re-checking data that is already in scoutbook / ScoutNet. So now with all units using ScoutBook, can we eliminate the Eagle application? Heck, ScoutBook already has a report that mostly fills out the Eagle application. The only two things on the application that are not in scoutbook are the reference letters and the project workbook. Beyond that, shuffling the paperwork is just redundant extra labor that slows things down and also adds the risk of losing the paperwork of the project or the reference letters or the pictures. Can we re-design the process and eliminate the Eagle application? Can we take the 9 to 12 week turn-around and change it to 2 to 4 week turn-around ? Can we save the labor, the gas, the postage, etc ?

Wow!!! That's a beast. Cool and fun to have, but still a beast. How well does it do getting pulled ?

Good choice. Of course, I'm laughing. Sometimes column advice doesn't match the needs of the original poster. I was far off. Of course, now your troop will require new scoutmasters to own a 3/4 ton pickup. Your choice is fine and makes sense. With a 80 person troop, I'd be tempted to have two trailers to support multiple events or allow people with smaller vehicles to help pull the trailer. I've always thought some months might be nice to split the troop (when we were larger). Those interested (younger patrols ??) could go to the district camporee and the more adventurous patrols could do a hiking trip or canoe trip. You might want to keep your existing trailer to support smaller events or to store less-used gear.

I've reviewed and signed 300+ eagle project proposals. I've been on EBORs and helped many scouts. My personal opinion is that all the requirement "hoops" are guidance to create a quality program. Focus on the quality and the program. Opportunities for advancement can naturally occur within that structure. Get these scouts out doing things. Camping. Volunteering. Exploring opportunities. There is no "ideal" scout path except individual paths that keep the scout active. Make sure these new scouts get a big activity every year. Maybe a few big/moderate activity every year. Each month should include smaller manageable activities / programs. Most importantly, let them set their journey and decide what these activities are. PLC consider rank requirements during annual planning. I've always viewed advancement as an individual scout activity (not a troop program), but the troop annual program plans should support / consider the concept of "first class in the first year". What I mean is that it's up to the scout to take advantage of opportunities and to drive their own advancement. But the PLC should create opportunities in the annual plan for scouts to earn first class and earn merit badges. For example ... the troop doesn't have to teach the biking merit badge and have structured meetings around the biking merit badge, but the troop could offer a bike camp out each year. It would address a merit badge, selecting camp sites, using taut line knots to secure tents, etc. Most importantly, these scouts do have that tight of a time line. The scout and the scoutmaster sit down in a SMC. Draft on a piece of paper a timeline of what needs to happen when. The SM should help the scout understand their path toward Eagle. Things that take time. Challenges. How to get some things done. Then, have the scout put the paper in their scout handbook. Maybe every few months the scout and the SM can chat about progress and how the scout is doing.

I'll add a few that I think are key Weight when empty - Gear only adds more weight. Our trailer is 6x12 or 7x12 and must be 1500+ pounds empty. So even empty, vehicles are affected by the trailer. On one camp out, we rented a low profile UHaul aluminum trailer. We had that thing packed tight and you could still not feel it behind the car. Wind drag - How high and what shape is the trailer? Some trailers will pull easier than others just because of shape and height. Steel or aluminum - This directly goes to weight but also affects cost. But, a light weight trailer will save the volunteers money replacing their transmissions. Seriously. I've been in multiple troops due to having too many sons. For one troop, I regularly pulled their trailer. In the other troop, I refused to pull the trailer as it was a beast filled to the brim with cast iron and heavy chuck boxes and stuff. I would easily advocate for a troop to spend a few extra thousand to get a good light weight trailer. It's a matter of being kind and considerate to your current and future volunteers.

"If I could go back in time to when I started scouting" ... I'd do what I saw another troop do that I thought was really cool. They found an old broken down medium sized pop-up camper. The gutted it. Removed all the heavy weight junk until it was just a shell. Then, they re-sealed the base and used it as one big portable storage box. The low profile reduced wind drag. Even a minivan could pull their scout trailer. The pop-up camper top was still in-tact. A scout on each end could lift the cover and lock the roof up so they could access the insides. The openness of the trailer promoted completely emptying it. In my experience, large troop trailers become the main storage. Troops carry thousands of pounds of extra stuff to camp that they use once a year. The result is only a guy with a Dodge Ram 25,000 can pull the troop trailer.

Fully agree. The only limitation I'd have is if the troop really has special unique rules. Such as if the scoutmaster requires service hours to be pre-approved or done within a troop coordinated event. If that's the expectation, I'd fully document it in advance. Same with eagle project proposal approvals. ... but I'd argue ... units just don't need to create special rules. Keep it simple. Keep it fun. BSA has lots already documented and laid out. The scout is already carrying around his Boy Scout handbook. I would not expect a scout to carry around bylaws or have to read a committee written legal document. Units need to document ...permission forms for camp outs ... where do you meet ... how much are dues ... how are fundraiser results used ... Units really don't need to HAVE special rules or punishments.

I fear this is more a threshold issue than any specific oath or law issue. Also, as a leader, I try to avoid hard line responses as you can only do that so many times before the scouts stop coming to you. I'd approach it more as being smart and having a conversation of equals and not a adult-leader-telling-youth conversation. I'd approach it as this is an age of youth-protection where there have been abuses. We are also in an age where people can easily mis-interpret. Even more, people are actively looking for gotcha opportunities to prove how politically correct they. So, many may think it's funny, but it can and WILL raise alarm bells. We could easily face repercussions for such a skit. So, is it smart to that skit given the risk and potential headaches ?

I agree. Filling PORs with scouts teaches our scouts a bad lesson and can lesson the perception of scouting's value because scouts are checking boxes and getting credit for a title instead of doing something. This reflects a comment that I wrote and removed earlier. Too often leaders get caught up teaching leadership as if it was the only benefit of scouting. There are lots of benefits. But those benefits are benefits, not the core focus. Focus first on the promises of scouting. Adventures. Friendships. Learning new things. Being part of a gang of friends. If troop leaders focus on supporting scouts as they pursue the promise of scouting, there will be continuous opportunities for the adult leaders to teach and coach subtle lessons (skills, leadership, etc) So, get the scouts up and running the program. Support them. Continually adjust. Beyond that, don't worry about having qualified leaders first. Spend your energy on supporting a great scouting program and finding the next warm cup of coffee.

... removed ...

Model the desired program early. Don't wait. Doing anything else creates a program that's not scouting. Get the scouts ... AND THE ADULTS ... accustomed to scouts being in-front and driving the program and the adults in the background. ... If you have 10 or fewer scouts, then you don't need a SPL. Just have a PL. Or if you have 10 to 15 scouts, have two PLs that coordinate with each other. But somewhere after the second patrol is created, the scouts should choose a SPL. A brand new scout may not be as effective as a fifth year SPL, but that's not the point. If you want effectiveness, then just let the adults always be up front. My main two reasons for this is ... scouts use these leadership opportunities to learn how to be a leader. Second, it's their program and they should lead it. I see no reason to wait beyond a brief introduction into scouting and what is expected. IMHO, the best thing is to setup the expectation early that it's a youth program with the adults in the background. I'm not saying you let things fall apart. We as leaders continually adjust to the scouts that we have and not wait until they are picture perfect. Heck, often scouts move on before that happens. .... So, a brand new SPL? Take him aside before a meeting. Coach him. Ask him what he wants to accomplish at the meeting. Ask him what he thinks he should cover. Ask him what's next on the schedule. Ask him how he's going to address menu planning. Maybe some subtle hints, but I've often found the best scoutmasters mostly ask questions and rarely suggest or tell. The key point is continually adjust to the scouts and find subtle ways to guide the scouts.

I'm not sure how much news this is. Our many years of Cub Scout camps were very much family camp. Some families had both parents there. Family camp may be just a re branding that the scouting program so desperately needs.

Tatung42 ... My apologies. I never meant to infer you did not know or that you were unreasonable. I fully understand and I've been there. I was in your situation 12 years ago with my second son. I had taken him on long canoe trips. Overnights on a local slow moving river with my father-in-law. I think it created some great memories for both of us. Then, the den wanted to go on a canoe trip as part of their fun. But we did follow BSA's rules and we grumbled quite a bit about it. It seemed ridiculous that an outdoor program put such tight restrictions on their members. On BSA's side though, there is clearly a question of whether an 8 to 11 year old kid is mentally and physically ready for a canoe trip. Can they save themselves? Do you require one-adult-to-one-scout ratio so there is an adult to save each scout? What if the adult is too busy saving themselves? Or saving the canoe? I've seen slow class I get dangerous because rocks get exposed and canoes can get trapped or tipped on those rocks. Add a quick forming storm and storms do happen. ... Even in slow moving water and with life jackets, it can get dangerous quickly. I flip back and forth on this each time I think about it. IMHO, it should be fine. I as a parent would absolutely take my kid doing it. But then again, it's my kid. As an organization, can BSA take on the responsibility for approving what could easily be an overreach by the den leaders ?