Beavah

Nah, you should be handlin' the adult hoop-jumpin' paperwork, CNY. Don't make the kids do that, especially not in your first year of operation. Just WAG the numbers on the tour permit. It takes time to build a culture of commitment in your troop/crew, and it might be hopeless in a pack, eh? Get a year or two of fun and success under your belt however you can. I suggest phonecalls. Then tighten up a bit, and turn people away. No point in arguin' or fretting; just say "sorry, you didn't sign up, you can't come. See you next time." Only takes a few times like that to start the brains workin'. But you'll still have to flex for kids from single parent families and split families, who often don't have a lot of control over their schedule coordination issues. So don't get too full of your own rules, eh? Just move 'em along step by step as best you can.

Whenever anybody does somethin' wrong, all of society suffers. Shopliftin' results in increased prices and unfriendly service staff and store owners. Drunks result in restrictions on social drinking. If a few goofs try to smuggle bombs onto a plane, we all suffer from delays, cancelations, and da TSA guy confiscating our bottle of Evian (yah, betcha never thought I'd drink one of those froofie bottled waters, eh?). If somebody in your patrol does somethin' dumb and hurts himself, the trip for the whole group may be ruined. And yah, sure, if someone in your tent pokes holes in the tent, it results in restrictions or penalties for everyone. Just like it was a hotel room, eh? Even if you shared a room, you get the bill for the damage, whether you were da guy who did it or not. Peer pressure is a powerful way of teachin'. To bring peer pressure to bear, the peers have to experience the impact that their neighbor's choice has on them. Learning that lesson through scouting seems OK to me. Better than learnin' it when your friend next door who was storin' weapons starts firing rockets into the neighboring country, and your house gets bombed.

So what does a council do to get Adults to training? I'd start with listenin' to those adults, eh? Pushin' training is like pushing string. You need to be pulling people in, and to do that, you have to know what they're lookin' for and what they need (and when they need it). From the little bit you mention, your leaders feel a need for outdoor skills training, but not for program/paperwork training. So offer more of the former, including "advanced" skills. Work some program refresher into that. Offer the other program stuff on-line, which is probably better than havin' some DE drone at 'em anyway. Problem is this would take creativity and involvement and effort by the council, eh? Much easier to just require people to go to the canned product training in their mind. I was also told to expect that in the next couple of years the councils insurance carrier is going to require every unit to have at least 2 adults trained in outdoor skills to go camping (and be covered by insurance). Yah, dat's a good one. A new "insurance isn't going to cover" myth. Horse hockey. Someone is feedin' you a line, eh?

CalicoPenn's is da way to go, eh? Plaques and knots and such are OK and all, but a letter like that is a precious thing to anyone who has given his or her time to kids.

Acco says: The USG spends taxpayer dollars for the benefit of the BSA. Yet, our courts have deemed the BSA as a private organization. That decision still has me puzzled.... Public institutions (public schools, military bases, etc.) should not sponsor private organizations. Egad. Public institutions sponsor and support private organizations all the time! Student loans, Pell Grants, and other scholarships go to students at private, even religious colleges and universities. Billions of dollars of research grants go to private and religious universities and companies. As a result, our higher education system and research are the envy of the world. The error is the other way, eh? Every time we make a claim that public monies must only be used by the government, we embrace the old Soviet-style service delivery model. Only the government can deliver service in the name of the People. We're the only nation in the free world that does not support private and religious K-12 schools. It perhaps isn't a surprise that our K-12 students trail other nations' students in any measure of performance you can think of, despite the fact that we spend more real $. We are hardly the envy of the world. Many European nations including some of our strongest allies routinely fund private youth groups like scouting, with direct cash grants. Who did a better job handling Katrina response, FEMA or the Red Cross? Which would you rather have your money fund? Nobody seems to mind Medicare and Medicaid funding the Christian hospitals that provide care to millions of people either. Yah, yah, I understand the ideological positions in all this, and I respect but disagree with the views of Mirlyn and others. I'm a pragmatist. The government interest is in havin' an educated populace, not in monopolizing the methods for educating. Heaven help us if all the Christian and private schools and social service agencies closed up shop. It would bankrupt many districts and states, and be an unqualified social disaster.

Yah, click. Way to go, eh? Welcome to da commissioner corps! I am really looking forward to getting started helping these units First rule, remember that you're not the one helping the unit, eh? Your job is to help the leaders in that unit, so that they make the unit stronger themselves. If yeh want to actually help a unit, be a unit leader. Given your limited experience on the adult side, I'd strongly encourage you to begin your commissioner duties by goin' out and visiting strong packs, crews, and troops in your district. Talk to da CC's and unit leaders in units that are stable, or growing, and that have kids learning, and excited. Watch how they do things. See all the different methods and interpretations and ideas that make up "good" and "great" units. See how even great units have weak spots, and how those don't really matter much; better to celebrate strengths than pick on weaknesses. Learn to respect good volunteers, and their (often different) approaches. You'll find a lot of successful units are not the way your troop did it when you were a scout, but it will increase your appreciation for the value of scoutin'. You'll need all those ideas, and those contacts, in your "bag of tricks." That's quite a challenge your DC set you up for, eh? Your best gift to the units you serve is to bring a sense of calm, outside, friendly perspective and a few new ideas and contacts. Listen a lot. Be creative. Maybe a unit doesn't need a SM, it needs a team of 2 or 3 SM's (with one registered as SM for paperwork purposes). Maybe a committee needs to take some of the grunge-work off of the SM's job description. Offer ideas, but don't push 'em. Help where asked, but remember it's their game, not yours. And find some other commish's to have a beer with at least once a month, or invite some of your districts best unit leaders to join you. Yeh need a community to support you, too, eh?

Yah... How 'bout names, council, lawsuit docket # and court of jurisdiction, eh? Somethin' that a competent fellow can use to verify anything? I sympathize with some of your sentiments; I used to live in a council that got in some public embarrassment over numbers fraud, and certainly none of us can support the messes in Alabama, Atlanta, or Chicago. But you're a bit over the top, eh? If SE's are usin' membership revocations poorly, and there's real evidence to suggest the trend is spreading, then it's somethin' good volunteers and especially COR's should be alerted to, and helped with addressing. We all need to role up our sleeves and help deal with bad apples. But you're runnin' around shoutin' about at da whole orchard without identifyin' a single bad apple.

I think CNYScouter's council is doomed. Yah, I agree. I know too many units like ASM59's. And as scoutldr suggests, even the men and women volunteers who do have the time will dig in their heels when it comes to BSA training because so much of it is so poorly done. At best, the net result will be the adult version of advancement mills and paper Eagles. Do whatever it takes to get "signed off" as cheaply and quickly as possible. The funny thing is that we run arguably the best youth education program around, eh? Maybe we can learn from that. How do we do it? The kids learn through in-troop teaching and mentoring. If the council insisted that all boys had to come to "New Scout Essentials" followed by "Tenderfoot Training Day", we'd all (hopefully!) be arming the militia. I wonder why we think that the great in-unit, self-paced mentoring techniques we use for kids won't work for adults? Instead we substitute in "worst practice" corporate training models. Not very mentally awake, are we? Yah, CNY. Your council is doomed. If yeh want to move farther west, though, we'll take a limited number of refugees, eh?

One of the objectives of boy led patrol method is for the boys become responsible for, and accountable to, and look out for each other. So yes, if other scouts watched and did nothing, then they have a lesson to learn also. I think this is another method the boy can learn good lessons from. All bad acts affect and hurt other people besides ourselves, and damage the community as a whole. It's just that often we don't see the effect we have on others and on the community. A SM who visits a penalty on the community for an individual's bad act helps a boy connect the dots from his own actions to the harm done his friends and troop.

Once upon a time there was a good kid who didn't like baseball. His brother was good at baseball, and got a lot out of baseball. His parents really liked baseball, too. But it wasn't his thing. He would rather be building model cars and racing them. Still, his parents made him play baseball. "It's good for you" they said. So he grudgingly did the minimum he had to. Whenever he could, though, he avoided going to baseball practice. But the coach liked his parents, and believed that baseball was a good thing for every boy. Even though he never came to practice, he was never cut. This annoyed the other players a fair bit. Every year, when summer came around, he couldn't come up with the good excuses he used during school to avoid baseball, so he got shuffled off to baseball camp. He wasn't a bad kid, but he really didn't like baseball, so even at camp he would avoid drills, dodge practice, and otherwise be a pain. His teammates really were annoyed by this, but he'd avoid them and just hang out with the one or two other souls who were also at the fringes. He frustrated his coaches. As his teammates got better and better, his performance remained weak, and he lost confidence. Despite all this, the coaches would say "our internet friends believe every boy can flourish playing baseball, so it must be our fault this boy isn't succeeding. We'll keep him in baseball and work harder with him." So although he sent all the signals he knew how without becoming rebellious and disobedient, this little lad couldn't get out of baseball. And as a result, he never got to pursue his real passion for electronics and auto racing. And he never accomplished anything in baseball. Shame what well-meaning adults can do to kids, eh?

Sometimes it is more of a Hegelian Dialectical spiral than simply opposites taking potshots at one another. Uh, yah, yah. One of them there dialectical thingies. Put me down in da low IQ category I think you missed a big factor, though. A lot of scouters here come at things with very different views of ethics. Some are very comfortable with revealed truth presented in written text, and may (appropriately or not) extend that view to wishing for authoritative text in other areas, eh? Others are more comfortable with finding "the right way" from a variety of sources, including text, and tradition, and evidence, and dialog with other people in the community. Still others distrust and rebel against "hard" objective notions of "right" in favor of personal freedom to develop and grow toward enlightenment. Another question is what people will do with the information they read and understand. This is my practical concern, too, eh? How is the recipient goin' to use the information we offer? Not all the parents on the forums are scouters, so we can't count on that interpretive lens, eh? And like all of us did at one point, many scouters are movin' from cubs to boyscouts to sea scouting/venturing and are often trying to adjust to a new environment and a new role. If Merri took our words to heart that her troop was doin' something "wrong" and went and had words with the SM (or sicked the DE on her, yada yada) what's the likely outcome? I can't imagine da SM smacking her forehead and saying, "Of course! Some anonymous twad on the internet told you we were all wrong and should be shot. We'll change immediately!" Can you? Nah, the SM thinks to herself, "I've spent 3 months thinkin' about this, talkin' to friends, kids, committee members, my other leaders, trying to balance competing interests, and now someone is gripin' over a move to cheaper pants?" Poor Merri gets put into the "problem parent" column, to be avoided and worked around (or worse, joked about with the SM's friends at the next roundtable). Merri happily ignored our advice about makin' a fuss, and just asked if it was OK for her son to keep wearin' his BSA pants he got for his OA ordeal, so she wouldn't have to buy a new pair. Like I suggested they would, they said "no problemo." (Though we did get a hint of some of da other pressures the SM is dealin' with, in the MC who wants 'em all in khaki). I think Merri's was a good answer. Be helpful and respectful, and tweak the program at its edges if it isn't working for you. Down the road maybe they'll end up in all green, or maybe it'll be better if they're all khaki, or maybe it'll stay a mix. But they'll get there together. And that is the real purpose of bein' Uniform.

Yah, Eagle309. I agree with you, eh? Usin' this incident to confront a boy about his lying is an act of service. It might be a bit late to follow up, but here's my thoughts. 1) Puttin' a hole in a tent is an act of carelessness. 2) Not being truthful is a serious issue. I'd sit the boy in question down and explain these two points (or I'd have his PL do it with me present; depends on da PL). Either way the PL or SPL should be there. I'd give him a big, wide opening to "come clean." If no dice, I'd bring in the other witness(es) and ask them what happened. That's almost always enough to get the boy to admit to it. Not a lot of lecturin' no matter what. Just simple consequences, administered with regret and care for the boy. 1) For pokin' a hole, a gentle reprimand & restitution. And sure, take the knife for a bit if you think that'll work. 2) For bein' dishonest initially but coming clean, some good hard service work to "make up for it", followed by a nice job and an ice cream to show he's back in good graces (if his service work was up to scratch). 3) For still not bein' honest, time off from the troop and a meetin' with his parents. Preferably until he does come clean at a SM conference. Then see #2. Thanks for caring, even when it's hard.

Yah, acco. I think people post here lookin' for support for their personal agenda (annoyed by troop policy, annoyed by camp policy, etc. etc.), with occasional genuine seekers looking for advice. Either way, I think it's perfectly fine for others to offer their own insights, advice, or data. To share respectfully. My personal inclination, when seein' people who are lookin' for support for an agenda is to get them to consider the other side. And then to get them to think about what's really important for the kids. Any agenda other than the aims and the kids really isn't worth feedin' eh? Sharing respectfully allows people to consider ideas and approaches. Using highly-charged language like "doing it wrong," "don't have a clue" "sacrosanct and above reproach," "power trip, insecure, angry" or even "not loyal, friendly, or courteous" pollutes that. It becomes people pushin' their own agenda, rather than helping a fellow scout/scouter/parent with different perspectives. And it's really awful netiquette, eh? Like Lisabob, I don't agree that we should tell people to go along with whatever (possibly ridiculous) reading of the BSA regs someone here or elsewhere happens to post. I agree with OGE and others, too, in that they also should not sit quiet in the face of unit safety issues or real dysfunction that compromises our aims. I think like a commissioner, most of da time. I think it's best to gather information, get people to consider other perspectives, and nudge 'em gently in a direction that might be a good "next step" for where they're at. But I believe our baseline, default position should be respect for our fellow leaders out there, as though they were our best friends from our WB patrol. Because they are, or should be. At least dat's what this Beavah thinks.

However, if I was asked point blank, "Is it okay not to wear Scout pants?" I would reply what the BSA policy is.... What would your response be to such a question? As a fellow commish, I'd respond by asking 'em things like: What do your youth leaders think? What do your adult leaders think? What do you feel best represents the ideals of the program for your unit? What makes sense as a team uniform in the outdoors for your unit? In short, apply the other methods (Youth Leadership, Adult Association, Ideals, Outdoors, etc.) to inform the question, as the unit tries to get to the Aims. Giving them the official BSA policy ("A uniform is not required for scouting") or the BSA guidelines answer ("If a uniform is worn, it should always be worn as fully and correctly as possible") or the real-world answer ("Most troops expect the scout shirt, and some set other expectations for pants, etc.") doesn't help 'em much, eh? I want them to learn to focus on the Aims. I want them to think about how to use the (other) methods to inform how to use this method. In short, I don't want to give 'em my answer. I want them to learn how to answer the question themselves, always mindful of their goals and their mission of service. Even if they make mistakes, they'll learn and grow and get better. Same as we do with da boys, eh? Don't give 'em a fish. Teach 'em how to fish. More useful, more friendly, and a lot more fun.

Good reasons, Fuzzy. And a nice implementation of the program. If a parent from your unit came to me to complain about your program or how you did things (after all, many of the ways troops implement scout accounts and fundraising are questionable, beads are not an authorized national advancement/recognition scheme, etc. etc.) I would tell them that Fuzzy is a great volunteer, and probably deserves their support and assistance, eh? I would support your implementation of the program, even if I didn't think it was "the best" or "the way I would do it" or "National's most current version" or whatever. Why? Because I assume you're doing your best to achieve the Aims, with the tools and people that you have. And because arming a parent to go give you a hard time about something really wouldn't help you to achieve the Aims at all. I'd be loyal to you as a fellow scouter, helpful to your parent in understanding the hard work you're doing, etc. Even if I offered that there were other ways to look at it, I wouldn't badmouth you or suggest that you were "wrong" or that you should leave the organization. And I expect you'd appreciate such an approach, eh? Do unto others is all I'm suggestin', and not so much to you but to all of us. I blow it, too, sometimes, but it's pretty in-your-face around here, eh?

Training is for dogs. Learning is for people. The BSA does too much of the former, and not enough of the latter. Requiring training will do little more than annoy people, most of whom don't like to be treated like dogs. Providing real learning opportunities would be nice, tho.

Yah, way to go red feather. Looks like a bunch of fun-lovin' Beavers are breakin' in on the order to celebrate their new member. Good job Busy! I ustah be a Beavah and a Good ol'Beavah too, But now I'm finished Beaverin'... I don't know what to do. I'm growin' old and feeble and I can Beavah no more, So I am goin' to work my ticket if I can. Back to Gilwell, happy land. I'm going to work my ticket if I can, eh?

Fuzzy, my emotional stand is not on uniformin'. The troop I came from before doin' district work is a full-uniform troop (well, except for socks). I wear a full uniform when I visit most units, though I recognize that I'm a guest and when in Rome I try to dress Roman. My emotional stand is on the members of our Scouting brotherhood who judge, critique, and criticize fellow brothers and sisters for their real or perceived failing to follow every jot and tiddle of BSA guidelines. I don't find it loyal, helpful, courteous, kind, obedient, reverent, mentally awake, or morally sound. I don't think it's consistent with the Golden Rule. In short, I find the Uniform Police and other Handbook Lawyers distasteful. They seem to spend more time on exacting compliance with the methods than achieving the Aims with the kids. I believe that approach, not troop uniform tweaks, is a "tremendously lousy example." So when I see it turn up, I automatically take the other side. Like I said, I guarantee that no program out there is followin' da BSA guidelines perfectly. In fact, I'd wager the more well uniformed yeh are, the more adult-run you are, and the more likely you are to be an advancement mill. Dat's not necessarily bad; we all make tradeoffs. We should respect our brothers who make different choices in their tradeoffs, and avoid judging them unless we actually see their program failing to achieve the Aims. Because who knows? That way we may learn something. The troop I am most affiliated with wears full uniform, but there are plenty of other things that some shirt-and-jeans troops do far better, program-wise. Maybe their example is the one to follow, not ours. Time, energy, dollars and adult "social capital" are all limited. They should be spent on things that help kids most. And maybe that's not pants. But we'll never learn if we don't relax, listen, and support each other. These forums are the only ones I know that frequently tell new, inexperienced parents to go back and complain to or fight with their SM or troop committee, who must be "wrong." Dat's poor advice, eh? We want kids and parents to support their troop and its leaders.

The one thing that you have not addressed is the issue of someone using the scouting name and the "public" would not know which group was which. Yah, that's true. It's true because the BSA has had a monopoly for so long, eh? If there had been other scouting groups all along, confusion wouldn't be an issue. The thing is, in getting its start, the BSA benefitted from the goodwill and name of Scouting built up by BP and others. We know BP was frustrated a bit by the BSA corporate model and how it affected the movement. So it seems like we shouldn't complain too loudly about others doin' the same thing we did. We just need to make our "brand" unique and interestin'. Coke, not just cola. BSA, not just Scoutin'. The rep. thing can go the other way, too, eh? A fun new scoutin' association might challenge us to be better, and might develop a better reputation for not gettin' kids lost in the mountains, or havin' lots of safe fun playin' laser tag. We might benefit. Once the "Scout Associations with Special Interest Agendas" collapse, the ones that remain focused on the kids might improve our American scoutin' community. Healthy rivalry; good competition. At least it would give us some fellow scouts to buy the camps we keep sellin', and keep them as scouting camps...

Rant Warning (not for you, Merri... for my fellow old codgers) I really do get into my Scottish-American stubborn streak when people start callin' fellow volunteers "lazy," suggest that they should leave da BSA, or that others should start arguments with them in their unit committees, or that we all should treat pants the same as youth protection. Get a grip on your toasters, people. How many units have we heard about on these forums that are rippin' themselves apart over silly adult disputes? How many kids quit or units die over such things? How much adult attrition do we get? And yeh want to start new disputes over pants??! I've been a commissioner for 15 years in 2 councils and 3 districts, and a unit and district volunteer a lot longer than that. I have never once, not ever, anywhere, seen any troop follow every jot, tiddle, and comma of the BSA guidelines. But I've seen a lot of great programs that deserve the unqualified support and applause of cheerful, friendly, courteous, and kind parents and fellow scouters. Stop frettin' your bones over trivia! It's da MISSION people!! From Fuzzy's post on the reasons for uniforming in the BSA books: "It is part of the thrill of being a Scout." Yah, right. Haven't seen a kid thrilled by it recently. So maybe a troop can do better, eh? "When you put it on, you feel ready for hiking, camping, and other Scout activities." Yah, right. Does anyone believe this? It's ridiculous. So maybe a troop can do better, eh? "You will show that you are equals in the spirit of brotherhood." Can't get this, since the uniform makes distinctions between boys of varying ranks. Adults are great at this with rows of knots and beads and such, to make themselves distinct, not equal. Sports uniforms are better at demonstratin' equality. And when some boys can afford new, well-fit pants for just BSA meetings and other boys can only afford beat up used stuff from the troop closet, or off-color look-alikes that they can also wear to school, dat helps with equality eh? So maybe a troop can do better. "You will be recognized throughout the world as a Scout." Yah, right. The world is full of different scout uniforms. The only real standardard clothing that signifies "I am a scout" worldwide is the neckerchief (often worn over plainclothes). And for us, neckers are too small and optional. Maybe a troop can do better, eh? "Uniforms build team spirit and are ideal for outdoor adventures." Yah, right. Team spirit only when they get to the point when the team members are proud to wear them in public. And ideal for outdoor adventures? Maybe a troop can do better, eh? "Wear your complete uniform correctly and proudly at all Scouting events." Yah, that's hysterical, eh? We all know that the uniform comes off as soon as there is activity rather than ceremony. But a troop uniform might do better, eh? Deliverin' the Scouting Program means using da methods and other tools to make things work the way they should for the kids in the program. Adults who teach kids to serve the bureaucratic letter of the law but not the intent and spirit of the law need some time off from Scoutin' to get their head clear, IMNSHO. It's about da mission, eh? End Rant, and my thanks for your patience and your listenin' with a kind ear.(This message has been edited by Beavah)

The correct analogy is car or automobile is equal to boy. Impala or mustang is equal to scout. That's just absurd, eh? The point was that "car" and "automobile" were terms that predated the Mustang or even the existance of Ford Motor Company. That means either someone else owns them or they are in the public domain. Scout and Scouting similarly predated the existance of da BSA. That means either someone else owns them or they are in the public domain. Scoutin' for All is, IMHO, a worthless organization, and BP-Scouts and YouthScouts don't seem to really exist. But that doesn't mean that the BSA, which I support, can use "any means necessary." Tryin' to claim and enforce ownership of something that you clearly did not create and do not own is not honest nor honorable. It's a tactic that the BSA should be as ashamed of, and that all of us who are morally straight should oppose. Having honor means doing some things that aren't in your own best interest because they're the right thing to do.

Hi Merri, thanks for the clarification, eh? Sounds like your leaders are doin' their best to respond to a real or perceived need... the "sloppy look" of the troop and lack of commitment to the uniform. So they heard you, and found a middle ground "policy" that would help get the dissenters on board with uniforming, without saddling them with the full expense of the BSA pants. For less money, they can get long pants and shorts in one package, that the boys can wear for other things like playing in the neighborhood or going to school, and that last longer. In short, they lowered the barriers to uniforming to help it happen. Good choice by the PLC or the adults. That's the way to get all the kids and families "on board" with uniforming. Then in a year or two as the boys grow, they can all shift to the new official BSA zip-off pants. Why would you want to object? You didn't object to a bigger expense just for OA. Who wants to get in a fight with other parents over pant purchases? And I bet nobody in your troop would give your son any grief at all if he wanted to continue to wear his old-style BSA pants. I'd suggest instead of worryin' about pants, you send a nice card thankin' your SM for his/her time and effort. And when next you see him, ask if there's anything you can do to help. The more you're a front-line contributor, the more you'll see the youth leadership at work, and understand the way the boys with the adult leaders set program rules. That'll make it seem less "highhanded" I bet. Yah, that's the best way to go. (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Hi Merri, The proper answer to this question is that your son should be loyal and obedient, and follow the uniforming policy and practice of his troop, eh? That's what good scouts do. Da other stuff is really for the SM, committee, and Chartered Organization to deal with using their best judgment. There can be all kinds of practical things you don't know about, like families who really can't afford the BSA-wear, or a troop's desire to wear uniform parts when traveling/in the field (both shorts and long pants), or a CO's ethic that disapproves of short shorts on men. Until you're willing to become SM or serve in an equivalent role, your job is to support the people doing the hard work for your son. The advice you're gettin' here to go back and kick up a fuss with your unit's hardworkin' volunteers is just plain bad advice. It'll hurt your son's program and your relationship with the other adults who are important to him. Dat's not worth it to save $25, eh?

This is a matter of US law. And international law, under our copyright and trademark treaties. Ironic isn't it that under those treaties, the BSA could try to enforce its exclusive use of the term "Scouting" against our brother scouts in Britain and Denmark. Same way Coca-Cola could stop a British company from selling a Coke knockoff. But I never said it wasn't legal. That is a question of law which has not yet been decided. I said it wasn't honorable. Law does not determine ethics, though we hope over time that ethics will inform law.

Sorry, SR540. The term "Scouting" is a term of prior art which was clearly in use by the worldwide movement prior to its use by the BSA, and indeed prior to the formation of the BSA. The term remains in common parlance worldwide referring to the youth movement begun by BP. For the BSA to claim ownership of the term "Scouting" in reference to a program of youth development is dishonest. It is the moral equivalent of a person stealing another person's invention and then patenting it for their own exclusive use. I'm a strong BSA and scouting supporter, but a spade is a spade.