greenSM

Isn't most of this discussion based on the FALSE assumption that any Scout should be First Class within a year? Absolutely any well run Troop should be ABLE to advance MANY of the boys through 1C in 12 or so months. Some will go faster, some will take lots of time and patience. Why all the rancor over the purely subjective "one year plan(s)?" My experience has been Troops that cling to the FCFY idea begin churning out Scouts that have little or no real knowlege of the information. My barely 12 yo nephew, for example, is 1C and working toward his Star. And yet he cannot tie anything except a square knot (and then only with rope in hand), cannot use a compass, thinks a band-aid IS First Aid, can barely dog paddle across his family pool, and cannot walk more than a few yards without stopping to play a video game. If he can stay awake through enough meetings though, he will get enough MB to make Eagle. Advancement is not only part of the Methods, it is an extremely important part of Scouting. FCFY is, however, NOT.

Trevorum was right. KISS. Model the Patrol Method. Yes, the boys may be too lazy to plan properly or cook but, eating steak and baked potatoes on a Patrol budget in front of them may inspire one of those 12 yo boys to something better. Shazam!

How about this? Run the Troop and Patrols according to the materials derived and distilled over the last 100 years until ALL of the adults and boys KNOW what is supposed to happen. Then, if there is something that doesn't fit/work (eg: most Troops in my area are 10 or less Scouts so traditional PLC-Troop-Patrol method morphs), tweak that instead of reinventing the wheel continuously. Maybe there's too many chiefs and not enough trained leaders?

Don't bet the farm on the Eagle records! In our council virtually every Eagle candidate and his MB councelors have been forced to dig and find their own copy of the MB card for one or more awards. My first Eagle Scout was missing five cards at Council, three of which I myself had hand delivered to the office!

I still don't know why the rules laid out in the G2SS are so difficult to understand: Webelos may not camp at Camporees but MAY visit during the event.

I still don't know why the rules laid out in the G2SS are so difficult to understand: Webelos may not camp at Camporees but MAY visit during the event.

When I stumbled on these forums I often thought EaMonn's constant mantra of "follow the program" was a little oversimplified. As it turned out the problems I faced as a SM and now as a Cub CM were frequently the refusal of, well, pretty much everyone, to follow that same program. As has been spelled out here on this thread, not following the program begets bad results. As I said on a different thread it is sad and discouraging to see the length and breadth of the problems caused by people simply not following the rules and the program. P.S: The paid staff for the GSUSA councils are as political and incompetent as the DEs and other "professional Scouters" of the BSA. My wife, a troop leader, has held three troop organizational meetings while her $50K+ director cannot even tell her where or how many troops there are in our zip code. Above the troop level it's just bureaucracy.

I would like to agree 100% with EaMonn. I have observed, however, in both my former troop and in my son's current troop a sad trend. Many boys are so used to being coddled and pandered to by their parents that the Boy Scout program is actually too hard for them. It's too much "work." They can't push a button or get an adrenaline rush every thirty seconds. I have seen Scouts rebel against "boy led troop" because taking responsibilty for anything is completely foreign to them. It's also difficult for trained, informed, and well-meaning leaders to move these kids 'off the dime' when their parents are-often literally- telling them, "You don't have to do that. I'll fix it for you."

Gosh. My _Guide to Safe Scouting_ says that Webelos are allowed to "visit only" Boy Scout Camporees. I find it extremely disheartening that this rule is almost universally broken by "trained" Scouters, Districts, and Councils.

Situation: a fifth grade Webelo quite our pack last spring. He had already met the minimum requirements for Webelo but, not for AOL. Now, in October, with her son in sixth grade and almost 12, the mother wants the pack (which has moved to a new district and a new CO) to work with her son to get his AOL. Despite telling her that he doesn't need an AOL to join Boy Scouts, she insists that he get it. The CC hates confrontation and is considering doing this. The committee is not opposed to doing this (if he pays his recharter) but, we feel there is a time for a Scout that age to simply move on to Boy Scouts. We, however, can only find guidelines for the minimum age and grade requirements. Any suggestions?

This issue is not about camping in the cold, it's about FOLLOWING THE RULES! Why are so many scouters so intent on bending and distorting not only the rules but the entire program?

If memory serves, the CC and the UC are required to sign-off on the QU app. It is far more likely that the unit or district is playing fast and loose with the paperwork than the Council (and there is no love lost between me and Scout Scouncils). Remind the committee that, as Scouters, "a scout is... honest" applies to them too.

I understand the concept of the CO 'owning' the unit but, that is not related to my request in any way. A Scout from my unit was removed from Scouting by the Assistant SE. The council and the region refuse to divulge any information or sources of that information to the Scout and his parents except to say that the Scout was 'involved with the police' according to their information (which was recieved frm inside the District apparatus). Nor will thay release any information on the appeals process except the addresses to which the family should write. AGAIN: I am requesting the specifics of the BSA appeal process and its specific source(s). The "Membership Standards" manual appears to be the source we seek but, we cannot locate it. Any help locating specific information on this process is appreciated.

The Council and Region should be providing the "facts" they have used in their decision. The burden of proof is on the accuser.

The law is not the problem. The questions revolve around the BSA's appeal procedures and their refusal to reveal information used to punish Boy Scouts. I am looking for info specific to the BSA and its rules and procedures and the exact sources for that info.