MattR

As of yesterday I'm no longer associated with a unit or district. I've lost interest in scouting and now have 3 grandkids that I care much more about. I adore them and even though I've had a cold twice, hoof in mouth and covid, all since the start of Nov, it's worth it. But I don't have time for meetings with bored teenagers or campouts with a handful of scouts. If the parents were still engaged like they were even 10 years ago I'd make the time, but they're not. It seems the same way on this forum. I'm not a leader and I never thought I was. I just kept at it because I believed in it. I'm not going to change anything anymore. So, it's time to move on. I hope scouting figures things out. It was fun. I have good memories. There were some good people on this forum as well. I may poke my nose in once in a while but my interest is waning. I'd rather go for a hike to take some nice photos. Take care everyone. @RememberSchiff and @Eagle1993 , I'll start a thread in the moderator area.

I certainly hope that within a week of when I die people aren't posting on this website about how lousy a scoutmaster I was.

@swilliams, I'm going to make this quick. Scouting works when younger scouts look up to older scouts. Scouting also happens in the patrol. So don't do patrols by grade. Also, scouts want to be with their friends. These 3 items create a difficult puzzle to solve. Some older scouts are natural at working with younger scouts and many are afraid of doing it. Most friendships are around age. You don't understand the scout dynamics as well as the scouts do. That's where the art of being the SM comes in. Another way of saying that is you flail around trying to coach your older scouts to do what they should be doing. I gave up on selecting patrols, let the scouts figure it out but make sure patrols are balanced. Good luck.

I figured out a very long time ago that the registrar must be kept happy if you ever wanted anything fixed for your unit. If they're removed then I can't imagine the frustration that will create. I mean, I just hoped the counsel exec stayed out of my way but I went out of my way to keep the registrar happy. They knew how to fix things. For those of you still dealing with these issues, I wish you luck.

I have a rain jacket that works well with a wide brimmed hat. I have rain pants that I rarely use. If I lived in more rainy climates I'd replace the pants with a rain kilt/skirt and possibly gators. All of which can grow with a teenager.

Give me a new name and a rough range of dates and I'll split the thread.

I think you guys are being a bit naive on this one. If there's one thing I've learned about the scouting program it's that motivating scouts about character only works on those that essentially already get it. If a scout doesn't want to be bothered about character then it's a really hard slog. So either the parents believe that character is important or, on occasion, a scout's parents are bad enough that the scout sees a need for good character. But that's not to say that there aren't lots of scouts or their parents that want to get Eagle. And there lies a big problem. Absolutely vanity is preventing improvement. But greed is oh so much worse. If you really want to improve program quality then remove the biggest source of greed, rank advancement. Be a scout because you believe in the ideals, not that you're going to get a better job. I got so tired of listening to scouts that, when asked why they were in scouts, said first that they were going to get a better job or into a better university or it would make their resume look better. It used to be very rare when they said that. It always used to be about fun, friends and the outdoors. But it has changed. I was shocked the first time I heard something about payback. The last time I asked a group of scouts why they were in scouts it was close to half that said they were going to get something from earning a badge. Maybe it's my town that has changed but I doubt it. TikTok, likes, influencers, search algorithms ... our lexicon has changed to that of greed and dopamine hits. This program used to work because most of the volunteers really believed in the fundamentals. They believed in it so much that they wanted to make it work. Quality would have been an easy sell then. But that has eroded over time. There are still people that believe in the the ideals but there needs to be a critical mass of those people in order for a unit to deliver a good program, where the idea of improving quality is even viable. My guess is that most units feel they're delivering a quality program if some kids are getting Eagle patches. And it makes sense because that's how the program is sold. Character is what you do when nobody is looking. It's not rank. It's not NESA. It's not OA. It's not a MB sash. It's not data in a database. It's what you do with your patrol when no adults are around. So, the first thing to do to make a quality program is to focus on a program with character and remove all the other distractions. Eagle is the biggest distraction. This reminds me of the Woodbadge game Win All You Can. Eagle is just goading people to do bad things. But they never come out and say it. It used to be that it was a method and could be used to develop character but that script has flipped. But that will never happen.

One quote from that struck me. This from a lawyer representing 75 survivors: In other words, if this plan is rejected then it's everyone for themself. Get in line and hopefully you're at the front. That's a couple of winners and a whole lot of losers.

I think it really started well before that. There's a peak around 1973, just about when I joined, and then there's another, smaller peak, around 1990. The first peak probably corresponds to the baby boom kids being old enough to be in scouts. That second peak is likely from the children of those in the first peak.

Did you notice that the author of the article was 14 to 18 years old? Maybe a scout.

I don't see nearly as many girls selling cookies as I used to. Sounds like GS is suffering like the BSA. Not sure their cookie overhead is any different than that for popcorn. Honestly, the drop in membership for both organizations is a sad statement about our drop in community more than any problems with leadership.

Makes sense, protection in numbers.

I'd push that just a bit further. Make webelos start a year earlier and last a year longer, so 4 years instead of 2. A lot more new scouts are afraid of the outdoors because fewer parents camp, so they're even less mature than before. So make the program about getting them ready to camp with a troop. And as you said, make it part of a troop. If a webelo is mature enough to move to a patrol when they're 11 then go for it, but most aren't. Anyway, as part of a troop they'd still have their own program but they'd see the scouts, get to know them and the transition would be easier. If this were done than cubs could be skipped all together. Yeah, I know, that will go over like a titanium balloon (lead's not so healthy ). So, end of my 1 1/2 cents of wisdom.

Well, the girls membership has dropped by roughly 20% in 18 months. My guess is the boys are similar, given that the girls percentage is nearly the same over that period. The point is a 20% drop in 18 months is ... more than a bunch.

I read this and what caught my attention was that the OA has, essentially, taken on the role of keeper of the flame for SA (Twitter, no!, X, no!, BSA, got it!). Joking aside, I wish them luck. If national is okay with this then ... maybe that's a way to participate? The OA asked for feedback. That's a change. The comment that troops are now much smaller is the first honest description of some of the problems troops are facing. More support for at least troops via something other than district beaurocracy sounds good to me, even though it sounds hard. Maybe the OA can come up with better training? I really wish them luck.