NeilLup

Having joined the Boy Scouts in 1957, I am a little before that time but can answer with a little knowledge. You joined Boy Scouts because -- that was what you did. As Calico Penn has said, America was a very different place then. Very white bread. Very suburban. Parents of the "greatest generation" who believed in having their kids grow up with the self-reliance of Scouting. There was segregation, both formal and informal, reflected in some cases in Scouting. Probably most significant, there was very little competition in youth activities and youth sports. While there was some little league, it wasn't the all encompassing 24/7 thing that it is today. You got to go camping and that was very unusual otherwise. I believe that one of the very major factors in the relative drop in membership in the BSA was the extremely aggressive merchandising/marketing effort to youth started off by the NFL in the mid '70s and then continued by Major League Baseball, the NBA, college sports and now NASCAR. It is not by accident that you see all the youth sports, etc. Youth represent a major revenue source for the pros and colleges. Athletic shoes are massive business. Back then, the Arrow of Light was a very small part of Cub Scouting. One was a Wolf at age 8, then a Bear at age 9, a Lion at age 10 and one started working on Arrow of Light at 10 3/4. You completed all the requirements for Tenderfoot in earning the Arrow of Light. But a lot of boys dropped out of Cub Scouting because Lion was much the same as Wolf and Bear with slightly different activities and electives. But then you joined a Boy Scout Troop whether or not you had the Arrow of Light because that was what you did and that was what your friends did. But, unless you were unusual, you didn't stay. The fraction of youth making Eagle was much smaller. It was very unusual to be an Eagle Scout but nothing was thought about it if you weren't. First Class Scout was a big thing. Eligibility for most things came at First Class (OA, Religious Award, SPL, etc.) Webelos Activity Badges were create in 1967 and the Lion rank was dropped. The Activity Badges were specifically designed to be different from Boy Scout requirements. If a boy had to do soil conservation for Boy Scouting, the Webelos Activity Badge requirements might target water conservation. The situation got much worse for transition in 1972 when the "Improved Scout Program" came in with a requirement for earning one merit badge to qualify for Tenderfoor Scout. The incoming Webelos Scout got essentially no head start at all in Boy Scouting. That situation was addressed with the Webelos to Scout Transition program started in 1977. But to the basic question, in my opinion, the most serious reasons for the drops in Boy Scout membership were the drop in total youth population in that time, (Our daughter, who was born in 1973 was in the trough year) and the increase in competitive youth sports and other youth activities aggressivly marketed and sold by pro sports, TV, etc.

Hello cad-guy: I checked what I could find in the Guide to Safe Scouting. It said the following: "Two registered adult leaders, or one registered leader and a parent of a participating Scout or other adult, one of whom must be at least 21 years of age or older, are required for all trips or outings." Note the "other adult." So if you were short one adult for a trip or outing, one of these CO affiliated individuals would do just fine. It's hard to see how such an individual would be permitted if necessary and not permitted if there were other adults around. Is it a good idea? The default option is that it's always good to do what your CO wants. It might make sense to find out why they want to come. If it's just to have a good time camping, then they might distract and that would be a disadvantage. If they want to watch and learn about Scouting, that could be a plus. If they can actively contribute to the program, so much the better. Insurance was mentioned. My understanding is that insurance covers registered members and persons who, in bona fide manner, are considering joining. I presume that there is some provision for family camping. What the status is of people affiliated with the CO but not otherwise affiliated with the unit I'm not sure, but I do know that the BSA bends over backwards to protect COs. Check with your council if you need to be sure, but I would say that if there is a reasonable program related reasons for them to go, great.

Hello, There is no formal procedure. Normally, it is considered that the person who appoints someone to a position can remove them. That would mean that the Chartered Organization can remove the Scoutmaster. If the Troop Committee wants to remove the Scoutmaster, they need the consent and approval of the Chartered Organization. Understand also that all of us are on one year registration. The simplest way to "remove" a Scoutmaster is to have a change when the unit reregisters. The person is thanked and someone else is appointed by the Committee and the Chartered Organization. If it truly needs to be done at another time, typically the matter is discussed privately among committee members. They reach a consensus and present their wishes to the Chartered Organization. If the CO agrees, someone or some people are designated to put the bell on the cat and tell the SM. I've done that job. It's no fun. Sometimes, the SM is given a meeting with the Committee and/or CO to discuss the matter and sometimes in connection with that, the SM is able to satisfy them that he/she should remain in the position, possibly on probation. One thing that is very important. There should not be a whispering campaign or a lot of rumors. That is effectively emasculating the Scoutmaster. Whether or not the SM is replaced in that case, their effectiveness with the Scouts and ASMs is largely lost. Your guide in this should be the Scout Oath and Law and the Golden Rule. If the person is doing their best but simply is ill suited for the job, they should be replaced with courtesy and kindness and likely offered another job that they can do well. If they simply aren't around, then they will likely welcome the change. If there is something more serious then rapid action is needed. Your Unit Commissioner and District Executive can help you in this area.

Hello Uz2b, An extremely interesting suggestion. I think that its a shame that you didn't ask the Scout to do something like this. If you had asked him to do it, rather than requiring it, mother might not have gotten so involved. In fact, there's nothing to keep you from asking him to do it now He is an Eagle Scout now. As something done freely and voluntarily rather than required, he might be willing. Gern, You certainly can suggest this to the National advancement group. I suspect, though, that it won't get a lot of traction because it is very different from other requirements in the sense that all other requirements can be done at any time while working on the rank. While the situation you are addressing is a frustrating to individual unit leaders, I believe that the National advancement group believes that is a misunderstanding of advancement on the part of those unit leaders. But give it a try. You have nothing to lose but a little time and some paper.

UZ2B, I believe that it is listed in the National By-Laws. I'll need to look as I don't have my copy here. Gern, For the "advancement freak", this could cause an extremely interesting phenomenon. The boy would do no leadership until he figured he was just about 6 months away from his Eagle. Then he would do his POR. Law of unintended consequences and all that.

Twocubdad, I truly like your approach and it is the first time I have ever heard of it. The only disadvantage I can see is that it could require a Scout to tell at length why he wants to be an OA member and get his imagination and hopes up and then risk not being elected. However, done thoughtfully, that's a major learning experience. The other parts of it -- requiring the Scout to say how he would be active in the OA, etc. I really, really like. Normally, the SM thinks that he or she needs to make the decision based on a 3rd party evaluation of "character" etc. This is a very nice touch.

I haven't found the comment on this web site but the interpretation of the Wood Badge requirement is, I understand, that the Jamboree Division at National asked the Boy Scout Division what the course is now called and the answer given was "21st Century Wood Badge." So they listed 21st Century Wood Badge. I understand that the intention is that any Wood Badge is acceptable if so considered by the local council. As far as being "sent home" by the Jamboree medical staff, I am 100% certain that this is not the BSA setting up some kind of stealth "gotcha." Rather, I believe that they are concerned that some Scout leaders can get their buddy the doctor to sign up as their being fit for Jamboree when they know and everybody else knows that they really are not. I would imagine that if there is some question about a person't fitness, they can contact the jamboree medical staff in advance and obtain guidance on their situation. I would find it inconceivable that if the person's medical condition on arrival is the same as when they checked in advance with the jamboree medical staff that there would be a problem and the person would be asked to leave. However if: 1) The person's physical condition really is inappropriate for the Jamboree and they got a "friendly" doctor to sign their form or 2) The person's physical condition upon arrival is substantially different from what is reported on their medical form then there might be a problem. I can only speculate this has been a problem at previous Jamborees.

Hello Packrats, You should feel good about it. It means that your council is reading the BSA advancement guidelines and following them. When that happens, it often means that they know what they're doing and your Scout will have a good experience.

Hello OGE, I am quite confident that if an Eagle candidate were to complete all his requirements prior to his 18th birthday and "promptly" submit his application to the council office and have it rejected, upon appeal to the National Council, the appeal would be upheld and the council directed to hold a Board of Review. Also, as others have said, there is no requirement that the SM Conference be held after all other requirements are done. Also, there is no requirement that the Scout "pass" the SM Conference, only that he participate in one while a Life Scout. He may have already done that. There is no requirement that it be in person (It could, for example, be by phone if necessary.) But it does need to be completed by the 18th birthday.

The "problem" seems to be almost always the same. 1) There is a boy who is very active in Scouting up through Life Scout and about age 14. He is very close to Eagle Scout at that point. 2) He then is lured away by the siren song of girls, cars, high school, peer pressure, etc. and either never shows up or does so very rarely. 3) In hopes that he will return, the Troop keeps him on the roll as an active member. Perhaps his parents pay his dues for the year and perhaps the Troop is one which does not require that reregistering members pay each year. 4) A few months (weeks, days) before his 18th birthday, the boy returns and wants to complete his Eagle award. He does so a short period of time before his 18th birthday. 5) His Eagle Board of Review occurs after he is 18. The statement is always made "He is 18, so we cannot require him to do more." 6) We hear about it at that point on this site from the current leadership of the unit. They have no current knowledge of the boy and want to turn him town for Eagle for (pick one ) not being sufficiently active immediately prior to the EBOR, not giving back to Scouting, poor character for not being active, etc. 7) There is the weeping and the gnashing of teeth about the Eagle being devalued, the value of Eagle being diminished, the fact that none of the current Scouts know the boy, etc. If I had a dollar for each one of these that I have read about, I could retire a wealthy man. OGE asks some very good questions and makes some very good suggestions. I can only suggest to any unit that really wants to draw the line that they should either strike the boy from the rolls at reregistration time and require him to request membership again when he is close to 18 with the clear intention of likely not granting the request or transfer him to "associate membership" (I believe that status still exists) again with the idea of requiring him to request active membership and likely having that request not granted. I then respectfully ask who benefits from this type of Horatius at the Bridge approach to Eagle Scout? Perhaps all of us believe that there should be some requirement for demonstrated active service immediately prior to the EBOR. However, the National Advancement Committee disagrees and believes that if the requirements have been met, the boy should become an Eagle Scout. They do not believe that requirements met WHILE A LIFE SCOUT should be discounted just because that may have been several years in the past. Does the boy who is turned down benefit? Likely not. He just either becomes ticked or doesn't care. And Scouting will likely have lost another potential adult supporter. Do the boy's parents benefit? Very doubtful. They just get ticked. Do the boys in the Troop benefit? If the Troop is Courteous and Kind, no. There will not be a public announcement that XXXXX has been turned down, it will just privately happen. Will Scouting benefit? Hard to see how. There will still be plenty of last minute Eagles. Will the Troop adults benefit? They are arguably the only ones who might. They will feel good that they kept the Eagle tough. I know a number of men who feel good about Scouting and who are active adults who did not make Eagle because of one or two requirements. In every case, they admit and acknowledge that they were the ones responsible and it was their "fault." I have yet to meet anyone who was turned down by a Horatius at the Bridge Board of Review who is anything other than extremely angry with Scouting and whose attitude is, at best, forget Scouting forever and at worst "I'm gonna get you guys." And this is true even if the boy appeals and the appeal is successful. He may use the Eagle for his own benefit. But his relationship with Scouting is irreparably lost. If we are in this Scouting business for the benefit of the Eagle candidate and the other boys in the Troop, rather than our own "feel good", we need to come up with a better way to enhance the Eagle than a last minute Board of Review turn down for a boy who, objectively, has met all the requirements.

Actually, Bob, I believe that the reputation came from the boys (and many are now men) who completed the requirements and became Eagle Scouts. And those requirements have changed mightily over the years. Prior to 1963 (or so) for example, there was no project. Until about 1972, Lifesaving (with water rescues) was required and there were no medical waivers. Until the late '40s, I believe that Bird Study was required. So I don't think that the reputation came from the requirements. Rather it was from the people that met the requirements.

There are those who would so define it, Ev. It used to involve a lot more activities that could be called "hazing." There are also those who might call two-a-day practices for a football team "hazing." The dictionary definition is: "subjection to harassment or ridicule." Hopefully the OA ordeal does not involve ridicule. Whether it represents harassment or not may be in the eye of the beholder. I am sure that the BSA legal staff has carefully reviewed the Ordeal activities.

As I think back on hazing, there as another factor that distinguished hazing from some other activities that are, in my opinion, far more sinister. In hazing, as I remember it, one typically wanted to become a member of some group. As part of the joining experience, hazing occurred, possibly to determine that you were "tough" enough to join or whatever. However, when you passed the hazing, and you joined, THE HAZING STOPPED. In fact, you probably got to haze other people as they wanted to join. In contrast, in bullying or other such activities, there is a continuous power play between the bully and the victim. It never ends and never results in the victim joining the group. Or, in some particularly sinister forms, the victim thinks that they have joined but then receives a particularly evil trick. Think of the movie "Carrie."

Hello Twocubdad, I'd welcome the opportunity to see them too. I would note two resources on bullying. One is the BSA unit of supplemental training on bullying: http://www.scouting.org/BoyScouts/TrainingModules.aspx These is both an hour long training and a power point presentation. The other is the material on the TF/2ndC/1stC videos on bullying: http://www.scouting.org/applications/rankvideo.aspx They aren't exactly hazing, but are a very close cousin.

Hello Scott, Welcome. Which Arkansas council is yours? I ask that because almost all councils have some campership funds and if money for camp fees is truly the reason that your Scouts can't attend the council camp, your council might be able to help you. Having said that, it sounds as if you did a wonderful job.

Crew 21 makes some very good points. There is one almost definitional difference between the 13 year old and 17 year old Boy Scout. The 13 year old Boy Scout has been a Boy Scout for, at most 4 years and most likely 3. That's about 25% of his life and about 50% of his cognizant life. The 17 year old Boy Scout has been a Boy Scout for 8 years possibly and more likely 7. That's about 40% of his life and about 70% of his cognizant life. He has demonstrated that he has at least some interest and some commitment to Scouting over a very long term. Do we feel better about a boy who makes Life, becomes rather inactive and then returns to complete his Eagle at almost 18 or a boy who cleanly and legitimately makes Eagle at 13, stays a little and drops out never to return?

"We ended up reprimanding the initial two who'd complained to mom for non-scoutlike behavior (exessive competitiveness, pushing, pretty much just being rotten jerks, really), as well as letting the other two know that ANY time they were unhappy with the way other boys were treating them, they could come to us and we'd respond immidiatly. " Hello gcan, One man's opinion here. It may be the minority. Part of what kids need to learn and practice is how to handle these situations themselves. When they are adults, there will not necessarily be others around willing or able to handle these situations. Even as older youth, they may need to handle it more themselves. It is totally appropriate to suggest that if they want to come to you, you'll handle it. But I am not sure it is appropriate to expect that they will come to you. They do need to learn to handle it themselves. This is such a mind-bogglingly sensitive area. With some persons looking for any conceivable opportunity to feel discrimination, it can be almost impossible to tiptoe through the mindfield. And that is particularly true as youth love to say things that they know will cause a major reaction. It sounds as if you handled it well. You did your best. That is all you can do. It is impossible always to be right in this area.

Hello uz2b, 1. You know that the kid is going to end up as an Eagle Scout. You have a choice. YOu can delay it, possibly end up with an appeal, end up with the kid ticked at the Scouts and possibly with the Scouts and give a bad taste to all OR 2. You can go forward and at his EBOR try to lay the groundwork for his being a "good" Eagle Scout. If a kid meets the requirements including character, etc. he becomes an Eagle Scout. You have indicated that he has good character and spends a great deal of time as a fireman. That's pretty special. Would you like to have him as the Fire Chief in a number of years feeling good about Scouting and about his being an Eagle Scout or feeling negative because he chose to give very meaningful service in a way other than Scouting? At the EBOR, I might ask some of these questions: 1) In the last few years, you have done very little in Scouting. Why do you now want to be an Eagle Scout? Why do you care? What does it mean to you? 2) Your service to the community has been as a firemen. Why do you choose to be a fireman? What does it mean to you? 3) Because you haven't been around much, there will be those who say that you don't deserve to be an Eagle Scout. What would you say and will you say to them? Why do you deserve to be an Eagle Scout? 4) You will be an Eagle Scout for all of your life. What does that mean to you? What does that obligate you to do and to be? What will you do and what will you do differently because you are an Eagle Scout? 5) Scouting would like to be able to take your knowledge and character and pass it on to other Scouts. How can that happen? What can you and what will you do to aid younger Scouts? If nothing else, you may get a good counselor for merit badges like Firemanship, Safety, First Aid and Emergency Preparedness. You also may get great visits to the firehouse for Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts for as long as you wish. If, rather than this boy being a fireman, his interest were instead in pitching a baseball and he could pitch at 100 miles per hour, so that he were the first draft choice for a major league team, not only would you and the community be incredibly proud of him, he likely would be on the cover of Boy's Life. With the same record of participation that you mention. everybody would be saying that it's amazing that he still does any Scouting with all the time that he is spending with baseball. He would get the Eagle in a heartbeat and would be lined up to be a Distinguished Eagle Scout the minute that his 25 years service was up. I feel a whole lot better about him being a fireman than being an uberjock. But the uberjocks get the adulation in our society. With deep respect to you, I suggest that you and the Troop not be selfish and not downplay the extremely valid way to provide service that he has chosen. He has demonstrated citizenship, character and fitness. He has moved on from being a boy and is doing what men do. It's hard to say that's bad. This kid is NOT a mistake as you have described him.

I first became a serious adult leader in the Air Force at age 24 when I became a Scoutmaster. There were challenges in not being a parent, but other advantages. Things are a big different now in that there is so much more awareness of and sensitivity to child abuse. As others have said, I would suggest that you confront that head-on, tell the unit why you want to be a leader, encouage them to check your references and get them to tell you how much they are comfortable with you doing and not doing. Until they get to know you, I would be even more scrupulously careful than usual about youth protection, etc. I would also take a full set of training as soon as possible even if you think that you don't need it. And get to Wood Badge at your earliest opportunity. You want to work with adults and be considered an adult.

Hello Gold Winger, I believe that the job and badge of ASPL did not exist until the late '50s, early '60s. I remember that when the job was created, I was the first person in our Troop to hold the job.

Hello Cubs, The POR is required during the period of time that the Scout holds the rank, which begins with passing the Board of Review. So, for example, for Star Scout, the POR must be held after passing the 1st Class BOR. There is a common misconception, though. The POR (and tenure) do not need to be completed immediately prior to the BOR for the new rank. This commonly comes up for Eagle Scout when someone makes Life Scout, completes his 6 months tenure and 6 months, etc. and then is lured away by the siren song of cars, girls, etc. If and when he returns, he does not need to complete those requirements again; they have been completed. He does, of course, have to display Scout Spirit.

I would suggest that in addition to a physician, probably prior to going to the physician, you have an evaluation by a GOOD physical trainer/rehab expert. We have an excellent one that we go to. About every 3 months, something goes wrong with my knees. Combination of old injuries and too many birthdays He diagnoses it, gives some exercises and normally can say with some pretty good accuracy "This will get better in this way in about XXX time if you do these exercises." He is very fast to refer things to the physician if appropriate, but we have found his practical advise and exercises to be particularly useful.

Hello Jim, I apologize for less than sensitive words at the end of a long day. The point of my question was this: There are some awards which involve meeting some requirements and once those requirements are met, all further processing is automatic. There are other awards which have requirements but then involve a review at some other level not to see that the requirements are met, but to determine that the individual is "worthy." Awards where the person can be deemed locally to meet the requirements but still have the award not granted because of a "higher level" review not for requirements but for merit. An example of the former is the Scoutmaster Award of Merit. If the person meets the requirements and the local decision is made that the person is worthy, the rest is administrative. Examples of the latter are the National Court of Honor awards like the Heroism Award, the Honor Medal and the Medal of Merit. The local council can determine that the person is worthy and submit the award. However, there is a further review for merit at the National level and it is very possible for an award to be downgraded or even turned down for not being sufficient meritorious. Distinguished Eagle Scout is the same way. The local council can make the nomination. However, a Natioanl commitee determines whether the person deemed "distinguished" at the local is indeed sufficiently distinguished to receive the award. None of these awards is limited in number like the District Award of Merit and the Silver Beaver. As many can be awarded as are deemed to meet the requirements. So it would appear that the requirement for the Masonic award in this case is to be a Mason in good standing, a Scouter in good standing and to have someone at the local council and the local lodge care enough to put in the nomination. It does not appear that the requirements call for the person to be "outstanding" or "distinguished" or in some way be other than a card carrying, dues paying member. That's not criticism, simply a statement of fact. So if, for example, some Scouting person at local lodge would decide that every member in good standing who is a registered Scouter should be put in for the award, would they all get it? Or is there some implicit quota that a local lodge may not nominate more than one or two people per year? The quota may not be stated or be public, but it may be there. Do you know?

This is interesting, SDE. Is the idea that it is almost some kind of "warm body award" where if one is a Mason in good standing and a Scouter in good standing, they get the award or is some judgement involved. Have you ever had a Mason in good standing and a Scouter in good standing submitted for the award and had it not granted? If so, by whom was the decision made not to grant? Does the nomination involve a lot of data and substantiation or is it primarily certification of active service in both the Masons and the BSA?

Hello fgoodwin: I am really shocked that there were so many potential Den Chiefs and so few Dens that the job was reserved for Life Scouts. Amazing. What did the Troop do to make the job so popular?