Horizon

Our Troop: Since I became SM: No oversized Sheath Knives (changed from no sheath knives). What is oversized? Bigger than the Buck the Scoutmaster has carried since he was a Scout. I argue with a member of my Committee about this one regularly. I prefer a sheath knife to a folding knife without a lock. Policies from before I became SM that continue: No bottled water, paper towel, paper plates, or other disposable items. No cans of soda UNLESS we are backpacking. If you are willing to carry it, go ahead. Electronics - I don't want to see them, I don't want to hear them, I don't want you calling home, and don't complain if you lose it. For food - no restrictions, but the SPL reviews the menus to make sure that there is enough food and the food groups are covered.

No plastic water bottles, only refillable / refilled. No paper plates or other disposable dishware. No paper towels (in truth - one roll exists on a campout). The boys are to bring dishtowels instead. The patrols (and adults) still waste too much food I think. We are getting better on that.

Ninth district ruled that it is un-Constitutional to require someone to attend AA.

I am Scoutmaster for a Troop of around 80 (and growing). I could not do it without Patrol Method and mixed age patrols. I CAN'T micromanage activities in each patrol site, there are too many of them. Instead, I depend on my SPL and the PLs (the PLC) to keep things going, and focus my mentoring on them. One difference - the Patrols in my Troop are 10+ boys enrolled, since that results in closer to 8 on any given activity. I have one mega-Patrol at 15 or so, but none of them wants to leave or change so I leave them as they are. They have great Esprit de Corps, who am I to argue?

I am on the same path, just ahead on the trail: 1) With 50% participation, I let my patrols go to 15 or so. That still results in a solid 7-8 on a campout from my 5 patrols. 2) I don't do provisional patrols. If two patrols want to work together - that is their choice. 3) 3 ASPLs - one handles Patrols, one handles the staff (QM, Scribe, Historian, Librarian, etc.), one is in charge of activities and planning campouts. 4) Two quartermasters, plus every patrol provides a patrol QM for QM days. 5) We are limited in our camping facilities due to size. We have not started splitting up as a plan. On backcountry runs, we can only have 12 - 15 on a Wilderness Permit. We tend to have a hard core trek separate from a shorter trek and take it from there. 6) We have a big trailer now, and the joke is that to become an ASM you have to have a V8 with a hitch.

Our trailer has a steel mesh cage that holds the larger refillable propane tanks (one per patrol). This keeps them outside of a closed container, and protects them as well. We also have racks for hauling poles for pioneering projects (where we camp, no gathering of wood is allowed).

Beavah: Your comment about birth rates is off a bit too. Birth rates in all educated, first world nations are lower than the 3rd and 4th. More specifically, it has been shown that education and work opportunities for women are heavily correlated with a lower birth rate. Obviously, access to various means of contraception also has an impact. Immigrant communities drop their birth rate in the 2nd generation, if not in generation 1.5 (depending on when they entered the US, and how you classify someone born outside, yet raised in the US). However, if all of that was creating a generation of pro-life conservative voters, we should have started seeing that in polls. James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal has written on this (he calls it the Roe Effect). He assumes, however, that an abortion by a mother reduces the number of children that particular mother would have had. That is not necessarily true, which could impact his projections of a change in voting patterns. It also raises the issue of whether or not children will vote like their parents. In the same sense, the younger generations are also less likely to care about someone's sexual orientation, even if they are conservative. The DADT lawsuit was brought by the Log Cabin Republicans. There is a new, younger brand of conservatism that is more heavily associated with libertarianism out there now (see the book "South Park Conservatives" for an overview). They have the anti-government and fiscal constraint down, but in California they are voting FOR prop 19 (legalize marijuana) and they voted against prop 8 (anti-gay marriage).

BrentAllen: While it is true (based on some data sets) that people alter their place on the conservative / liberal scale as they age, you are incorrect about the trend regarding the acceptance of homosexuality. The trend continues to show more acceptance of gays and lesbians over time, and the voting polls of California showed that it was those over 65 that were majority opposed, with those under 65 in favor. More data here: http://www.aei.org/docLib/20080603-Homosexuality.pdf "ACCEPTANCE: In 1973, when the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago first asked people about sexual relations between two adults of the same sex, 73 percent described them as always wrong and another 7 percent as almost always wrong. When the organization last asked the question in 2006, 56 percent called them always wrong and 5 percent almost always wrong. NORC interviewers have asked the same question about extramarital sexual relations over the period, and they find no liberalization in attitudes. As for pre-marital sexual activity, in 1972, 37 percent told NORC interviewers that premarital sexual relations were always wrong. In the latest poll, 27 percent gave that response, while 46 percent said they were not wrong at all (See Comparisons section of this document). Forty-three percent in 1977 told Gallup interviewers that homosexual relations between consenting adults should be legal. In July 2003, after the Supreme Courts June 26 decision in Lawrence vs. Texas, 48 percent gave that response. In May 2007, 59 percent gave that response. Acceptance can be measured in ways other than legality as other findings in this document show."

Again, assuming the local option allows a Troop's Charter partner to choose their leaders, I don't think that we will lose as many as we think. It will have to be emphasized that there is NO forced change being made to the Troops, only that Troops will now have the OPTION of choosing their leaders from a minimally larger pool. A few people have brought up the issue of gay marriage, and used that to discuss the level of support for gay rights. I think it is important to realize that in California, the votes against Proposition 8 have been analyzed. More than two-thirds (67 percent) of voters 65 or older supported Proposition 8, while majorities under 65 opposed it.

Local option would become the new system (as Gern put it). Some Troops would do nothing, some would openly accept gays and lesbians, others would specifically forbid them I could see some Charter Orgs suddenly being asked to make the decision. Our relationship to our Charter Org is minimal, without a single member of the congregation a Scout and one Scouter being a member and our COR. There might be some conflict at Camporee type events when the "gay troop" shows up (and you know that certain troops would get that name attached to them). A few Troops might break-up when the decision is forced on them. I could see a few years of Troop switching going on until the dust settles. "Do you allow gays?" might become one of the questions that Webelos dens ask.

His lawsuit seems to be that the school can't allow a discriminatory organization to use the school facilities. That question will probably revolve around usage rules that the school district follows, and determining if the Scouts are given any sort of preferential treatment.

Nope, but we also don't wait on the chits either. I have Instructors (senior level experienced Scouts) in the Troop who ensure that every new Scout is cornered and learns & earns all of their chits ASAP. The safe use of knives, axes, hatchets, fire, and saws is part of our break-in process for new Scouts in the Troop.

"Personally, I'd take the 17 1/2 year old Eagle over the 14...clearly the 14's parents earned the Eagle. " Really? I have seen high levels of parent participation at all levels. My younger Eagles tend to have involved parents - not helicopter, but Assistant Scoutmaster types. This meant that the Scout never missed a meeting or a campout since dad was coming anyways. My own son "benefited" in this way. Since I am at every meeting and campout, he was too. He couldn't HELP but be involved and advancing. My 17 1/2 year olds come in a few different buckets. - There is the one with 45 merit badges, 3 years or more as a Life Scout, service in multiple positions, who finally decides to do his Eagle project in the 3 months before his 18th birthday. - There is the one with 25 merit badges, earned Life years ago, served his 6 months in a POR years ago, earned his 6 months "active" years ago, who suddenly realizes his Junior year of high school that an Eagle would be nice to have and shows up to do his project. Either one of these buckets can have different levels of parent ownership. I have parents who won't let their kid earn their driver's license without an Eagle. I have parents who drag their kids to meetings. I have parents who do nothing, and don't show up to the COH. Age tells me nothing about how the boy earned his Eagle. As for me, mom and dad had zero roll in my Troop. They did not serve in any capacity, including MBC. Their entire roll was participating in the carpool for meetings and campouts. To state that my parents earned my Eagle is completely and utterly wrong.

JMHawkins - no sweat. As I mentioned, I do get testy on the subject since I came from a Troop described as an Eagle Mill, and I am a young Eagle as well. My older son earned his at 15, because he did not do the work to earn it at 14 (he delayed action on parts of his project and then discovered that some things don't happen overnight). Should a boy get an Eagle, or any rank, just for showing up? Of course not. But let me tell you how I did it. I did not miss a single Troop meeting. I did not miss a single campout, and we camped every month. I did not miss a single summer camp (plus the monthly campout in the same month). This meant that I never missed any activity, never was missing a chance to show my skills. Now add a Troop that made every possible type of learning available - and you can get a 13 year old Eagle. There was always someone around who I could go to for learning - especially the older guys in my Patrol. A lot of boys join Scouting, and a lot drop out. The ones who stick it out can make it either young, or death bed, or on their own pace, or however we wish to describe it. The poor presenter from the beginning of this thread might have only earned Communications MB (and not added Public Speaking). He might not have ever done a second presentation after that badge was earned, and his Troop might not have ever elected or selected him into a position that required him to make another presentation. The OA has a bar based on camping, plus elections, and a desire for service - nothing about public speaking. Eagle has one MB that focuses on presentations. Finally - some people will never be good at speaking to crowds (I love it, and do it for a living) - that says nothing about his rank or his troop.

When I see the words "Eagle Mill" I tend to take a walk away from my computer until I calm down a bit. The term is offensive and insulting. I EARNED my Eagle a few weeks before my 14th birthday. I will put my ESLP up for review at any time. I will happily discuss my skills, my PORs, my merit badge sash, and my continued dedication to Scouting. Even better - here is an article about my Scoutmaster and my old Troop: http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=370&articleid=20100919_38_D1_CUTLIN380568 He runs what some posters here would call an Eagle Mill. As a matter of fact, after listening to the insults and comments, I believe the Troop now has t-shirts that read "Eagle Factory." Read the article - if you want to call that Troop an Eagle Mill - go ahead. I would be PROUD to be considered in their company, and in fact as a Scoutmaster I work towards emulating the model that is described in that article.

Twocubdad nailed a lot of the issues. To do another comparison, compare to NON school sponsored athletics such as soccer. AYSO has more than 50,000 teams and more than 650,000 players (boys and girls) with brackets from U5 through U19. They offer recreational soccer plus they are experimenting with a competitive bracket. In AYSO EVERYONE plays, regardless of whether they come to practice. Players are guaranteed to play half of every match as long as they show up. Parents can choose to use it as a drop off babysitting operation. Every player makes a team. Every team gets to play. Nobody is turned down. The goal of the recreation league is NOT winning, but fun soccer. Outside of headquarters, everyone is a volunteer (much more so than Scouting as a matter of fact). I used to serve on our local board, and I still coach and ref. Our largest group of teams and players is at the U10 level (8 and 9 year olds). After that, boys start to drop out as they focus on fewer extra-curricular activities, get more involved with school, or if they have the money and talent switch into club soccer. This is not much different from what we see in Scouting. Cubs ramps up to our "middle school" program. Sometime in middle school, the dedicated boys stick around, some of the differently focused boys switch to Venturing/Exploring, and others drop out.

Kudu: At every site, I tell the Patrols to get as far away as possible. The Patrols are asked to also have distinct sites, and to have their flag proudly posted. In the past year, at ONE site was the Troop able to get 50 feet between Patrols, and 150 feet from the adults. So, when the territory is available, we spread out to take up the maximum space and distance. That type of camping site is very difficult to get around here, and we like to go somewhere new every month (we have around 18 sites on our rotation).

Accept the Scout. Deny the parents. The boy could use the Troop. The Troop does not need the parents. Tell the parents that you welcome the Scout, but that their input is not needed and not necessary. You just want them to drop off the Scout, and pick him up on time.

Older boys teach? Check Higher ranks signoff? Check Problems with some skills atrophying? Check With pop-up Coleman tents, no wind, and minimal rain - our knot skills are not tested without creating testing conditions. When I was a Scout, we slept in canvas tents and your knots determined your warmth and dryness. This is no longer so for my Troop here in SoCal. If we want to do lashings, we have to add gardening poles to the Troop gear for the campout. There is no gathering of wood at any site we camp at in our area. Lighting fires? Those are prohibited most months of the year, you can't gather fuel, and they are only in pre-built rings of steel using store bought wood. Map and Compass? The local trails are well worn and well marked. Next to impossible to get lost. 300 feet? Not a chance in 90% of the sites where we camp. So there are local challenges, and modern challenges to many of the skills. We work on ways around them. My last SPL liked to leave the tents behind and have everyone build their own shelters for the weekend. We had a carrying rack added to the Troop trailer for hauling the gardening poles. The problem, IMHO, is that many of the skills we require are no longer needed on a regular basis. Again, when I was a Scout we had to start fires to cook and we had to tie knots to have a place to sleep. Those two NEEDs have been eliminated through modern gear, and Leave No Trace. Our challenge as Scouters is to keep teaching these skills, make them relevant, and also keep an eye open for what NEW skills should be taught for a well prepared, modern, outdoorsman: Repair a propane stove Fix a tear in a nylon tent Replace the shock cord in a set of tent poles

onevoice - how does being gay make someone in violation of the oath and law?

onevoice: "And please don't resort to leveling the "bigot" charge at anyone that disagrees with you. " I don't. I level the bigot charge at people who are bigots. There are plenty who I disagree with, but when someone decides that my friends have a birth defect that makes them unworthy and unwelcome in Scouting - that person is a bigot. Period. Scout units used to keep blacks out, but over time units integrated. Scout units used to keep Jews out, but over time units integrated. Scout units used to keep women out of leadership positions, but over time this has changed as well. There is nothing in Scouting that should prevent a gay Scout or a gay leader. It is simply a reflection of our current society (much like the bigotry of the past was a reflection of our society then). However, society is changing its attitude about gays, much as it changed its attitude about women and minorities. There are still units out there that will not take a woman as an Assistant Scoutmaster, and they do just fine. There are units with a woman as the Scoutmaster, and they do just fine. Allow a COR to decide if they are ok with a gay leader, and let others decide to NOT allow a gay leader. Once that is done, get back to teaching boys how to become men through our Game with a Purpose.

Penta - it would take years, and that is fine. I doubt there would be a huge shift, and much of it would depend on how each unit deals with it. I know that in my neck of the woods one to two units would be created overnight at my church. Our youth group (mainly a high school group) would add a Venturing Crew component, and we might also start a Boy Scout Troop as well if we had enough boys of the right age. The Crew Advisor would be the same gay male that runs all of our youth programs, who takes the kids on ski trips, and who wrote the letter as the religious leader for my son's Eagle rank.

onevoice: "First off, it's not your organization, its all our organization, and no here cares how many knots you have." The knot comment was there for the posters here who have followed all of the threads on adults wearing knots, etc. Yes, it is our organization, which makes it also my organization. onevoice: "No bigots are trying to chase you anywhere, or ruin BSA. It is you that is trying to change the status quo. I would maintain that it is you who are the bigot. Why is your version of bigotry only when someone else doesn't agree with YOU? You want another organization, you go form it!" You just immediately contradicted yourself. You first tell me that nobody is trying to chase me out, then you tell me to leave if I don't like it. No thanks, I will stay and instead keep on working on changing things from within. I am not a quitter, and I know that I have many allies out here in the trenches. Finally, show me a statement by the LDS church (or any other group that controls a significant percentage of our youth) that they will leave Scouting if local control is passed.

We should have the adult volunteer form and the scout registration form available online, with the requirement that a copy be printed and submitted with a wet signature. There could even be an online way for the COR and CC to electronically approve. This is what AYSO does through their eAYSO system, and it makes volunteer registration much easier. The only downside is the need to remember passwords (I always have to have my pw re-sent to me each year when I do my annual update). While we are at it, can we also find a way to add roles for someone already in the system. I hate having to fill in new documents for each group, or when I add a role (like updated the merit badge counselor list at Council).

onevoice: I believe, and science backs me, that there is a biological basis to sexual orientation. Based on that, yes, I equate gay with black - as do many Americans, and as do the laws of many states in the US, as does my congregation, and as does the congregations of of many of my Scouts. Further, I completely disagree with the BSA's interpretation of morally straight to preclude gays. I find it interesting that the BSA allows local control to determine every other aspect of the Scout Oath and Law and how it applies to adult volunteers, but specifically prohibits gays and lesbian adults from serving as volunteers after being reviewed by Charter organization and the Troop Committee. But that is a debate that we have had several times around this online campfire. To bring this back to the original topic - I have plenty of anecdotal data that our policies cost us membership among people who would normally have joined Scouting and become amazing volunteers and contributors to our program. It would be interesting if a credible survey organization was able to gather the data to find out how much our policies cost us in terms of membership and support. As for creating my own organization? I have no need. I simply want my organization to be its best, to continue to provide the best possible opportunities for young men. The bigots can't chase me out. I will continue to be at Roundtable with my "Dress" uniform covered in knots, I will continue to volunteer at the Pack, Troop and Council level, and I will NOT allow the bigots to ruin my organization. Bigotry is not morally straight.