skeptic

Another interesting thing about those two books is that they were the first books illustrated by Norman Rockwell. Do you have the individual books from 1913 and 1914 or the double with the two combined?

Well, this piece from 1922 is quoted from New York Times. Even so, I kind of like it, no matter what some might say about the verity of the paper today. 1922 NYT article.pdf

An interesting item from 1952 about the Pope visiting.

This is an early award from the Oakland area. Do not know anything about it. Perhaps someone can fill us in?

The one with the odd salute is the cover of an LDS magazine. So, it may have something to do with them. The card is actually British.

1941 Jan.bmp

I am waiting for this forum's founder to write his biography of Bill. It would be great to add it to those of the other greats of our program. Also would like to find one on Robinson, even though he was more YMCA overall. His short-term assistance in those first few years were critical. Probably a few other pretty important names buried in those first couple of decades, but they tended to stay in the background.

I just finished reading a nice tribute in Scouting Magazine on Greenbar Bill, William Hillcourt. Not only is there the article by Mike Ray, but Bill is also the subject of Mike Surbaugh's short editorial piece. Do not know what has brought about the renewal of Bill as a major player in Scouting, but it is surely time. Hopefully it may be a harbinger of his Scouting knowledge in Boys' Life, as well as perhaps more in Scouting.

This year we have 4 recent Eagles that we are carrying forward under the College Reserve category. This category is helpful, since it does not require the training an ASM or other stipulations might. However, while some are not particularly affected by the fee, I wonder if there should be a limited waiving of it if the individual is actively attending, possibly not to exceed "x" number of years and verification of actual full time attendance. Just a thought. Comments invited.

It was not the memorization for me, it was the efficiency sending and especially receiving. We did it with flashlights in a dim room, or outside at night. Still remember bits and pieces, though surely could not send much more than SOS.

I just received a comic book from the forties called Patches . In it is a four-page description of how to earn Eagle, done is a comic book format. I was a bit confused by the shown requirements and went back and reviewed them for that period. Sure enough, Swimming was not on the list, but Lifesaving was; and since you needed Swimming as a prerequisite it too was actually on the list, just not shown. Further review reminded me of my own requirements in 1959 and realized, in rereading the previous and later requirements, that our short period actually had the broadest required list of badges when you take into account the ones from specific "groups". While we did not have to do a project, we had a far more challenging merit badge list, and of course, we still had to be First Class, which still required the gamut of pioneering skills, and also we needed to signal. Have wondered if the project had also been there if I might have not finished, though I like to think I still would have. It is interesting to review the little elements that got overlooked when writing the requirements, and how many of the changes probably resulted from realization of contradictions of sorts in many of them, like the early "no Life or Star, and thus no specific merit badges, for Eagle, only just 21. The discussions of how the effort is being marginalized really does not carry water when you realize it is not the same things you compare. In some aspects, even without the project, it may be more difficult today due to the type of society in which we now live. In the end, it is still an honor and a pretty good measurement of initiative and citizenship.

Calico; Have you done any investigation into Seton's work with the Canadian wolves? It is my understanding that his long study, often in dead of winter, is still one of the best studies of them available. Of course, the drawing he made of them, and even more so, the paintings, are both fascinating and a bit frightening. For a few years, they had the one where the pack got the trapper just short of his cabin on exhibit at the Seton Museum at Philmont. I believe it won an award in Paris,

It is interesting to look back on the Scouting history and reflect on who the prominent players were in the early decades. There was a definite clash between Beard And Seton, yet both were, in their own ways environmentally concerned. How they would fit into the modern definitions is another debate. BP was a hunter and made sport out of big game and wild boar. Yet, in his writings he often came across as for preservation practices, even in the area of hunting, recognizing that one could go too far and deplete the base beyond survival. Of course, Teddy Roosevelt also was a big game hunter, yet many would give him a large portion of credit for early advances in the governmental protection of wildlife and flora. Audobon was highly respected by the early Scouters, and of course we have Hornaday and Burgess. Today, some of the most important "quiet preservationists are the scouts who do trail maintenance and various conservation projects all across the nation, and, as I understand it, even more so in many other parts of the world. In our area, some trails would not be useable without the scouts who work on them through our local cooperative efforts in the Trail Boss program. And, while some fall short of the mark, most troops are cognizant of the meaning of the Outdoor Code and Leave No Trace. Sustainability is really just another discussion of the Thrifty point of the Scout Law. I too agree that it likely could have simply been another element of Environmental Science, but on the other hand, maybe it has a place, just as the other conservation MB's do.

I may be the only Scouter who likely got himself judged too impatient for the Peace Corp due to losing his cool on a runaway horse while in a training course in New Mexico. I was supposed to work with sometimes difficult people in the highlands of Peru, descendants of the Quechua, but I panicked when the horse got away from my control and went down a slope following horses with more experienced riders. I often wonder if I had not gotten selected out for that if I would have worked with Peruvian Scouts, or anything like that. It also put me on the top of the list for getting drafted, since I turned 21 that year of 1965 and was not in college due to the course I left. Never know, but life always has its challenges and possibly lost opportunities.

The old guard protectors of the Eagle award and past history and traditions are holding onto their own glory. Obdurate objections to a changing world will not do anybody any good, and may give some psychologists and ulcer doctors more work. Move with the times and find ways to make current challenges fit your involvement, hopefully to the overall benefit of all. As noted, life is seldom always fair. Whatever comes from all this, it can be positive or negative, however one chooses to view it. How will this affect any of us as time goes by. Our own Scouting accomplishments will not be nullified by new directions and changes in options. Just as in sports, the rules change over time. You cannot ever compare records from a century ago in baseball, for example, as the rules and equipment are different. I never did a project as it was not yet required, but I did have to learn signalling and splicing among other skills. As has been noted, Arthur Eldred never had to earn First Aid and it seems from looking at his sash and such that he did not, though First Aid to Animals is there. For that matter, he also did not have to earn Life or Star, as a few others of the very earliest also did not have to do. Does that change their place in BSA history? As I have "preached" a few times already, we either accept the inevitable and make it the best we can with the new parameters, or we choose to leave it to the new order. But letting it eat at us because we disagree, and bad mouthing the new order probably is not our most Scouting choice.

It comes to mind that perhaps we need to review how traditions are presented, and more importantly, be clear with parents and the youth as to what it entails. Most of these longtime activities have been around for decades and often become stories told as adults with fondness and mirth. Unfortunately, on a rare occasion. something may have gone wrong, and the memory or immediate response was not as intended. IF, all the parties involved understand what will happen and "still choose" to perpetuate the tradition, then that should be at the option of the family, as long as nothing is being done that is actually harmful. MOST kids will be nervous about some of these things but still want to do them. It is part of growing up and often a step towards coping with minor challenges. So where do you draw the line? Do you simply ban everything that might even remotely cause emotional trauma? Have we not possibly gone too far in demanding that we must protect people from any chance of physical or emotional trauma? If so, then we should be shutting down all the sports venues, all the game shows on TV, all the talent shows, and so on. Already we are seeing the results of this overreach, and it is causing us to have emotionally weak individuals who too often explode because they never learned to cope with the realities of life. We need to find that balance between real dangers and imagined "possible" dangers, and then be as sure as we are able that all involved are involved in deciding yea or nay. But, I am an old guy that somehow survived to date, in spite of numerous emotional and physical challenges. Yes, I was briefly terrified when two regalia-clad, very large teen youth grabbed me from a log and took be to the Chief when I was 15. Yet, the drama and traditional ceremonies from that era are why it was an honor. And just because a few misguided people went too far on rare occasion, it was still something that younger youth looked forward to and then stayed involved with due to the ceremonies and tradition. That loss is the biggest reason OA has lost its place in today's programs. Throw out the baby, along with the dirty water. Not the best way to respond as I see it. And the same can be said about upside down cubs and junior leadership like TLC doing basic boards for the lower ranks in Scouting, It was not only a leadership skill they learned, but it was real peer review. As long as rational adult supervision was in place, it worked well; and it still would. So, just like government regulations that overall are worthwhile, but have some tweaks needed so they will be even better, we need to constantly walk that "line" to make things safe, but maintain the mystique and possible character building challenges. JMHO of course.

Okay. We are talking about the very first one, and it was an experiment. Of course, you likely are simply pushing buttons.

Perhaps there might be a connection to the original Browsea Experience. Seems to me that BP put them in "patrols" then.

B.P. was not stuck in his own time, rather he was a forward thinker. He often challenged scouters and scouts around the world to embrace the new and find ways to weave it into their programs. He was a General who had seen more than his share of gore and the worst of society, having served in the Colonial system. He more than once hope aloud and in print that Scouting could become a movement for world peace. The fact that he turned to his sister Agnes and later his wife as well in regard to the female challenges speaks loudly. He also early on worked to find a way for the younger, as well as older youth, always exploring new ideas from around the world. And, as has been noted, he staunchly supported the spiritual element of the movement, though also accepted that it would vary dependant on where the program was, and what the family believed. In regard to the more current issues we have faced the past couple of decades, it is hard to say. If you have read some of the biographical material, there is a lot of gray area; but we are talking about a totally different cultural milieu. Again, probably not really equal comparatives due to the huge changes in not only mores, but also public exposure to things due to the instant information world today. It is sort of like comparing Ruth, Gehrig, or Cobb to today's ball players. Not only completely different approach to the game, but the equipment is totally changed, as well as the strategies. Most players simply went out and played, every inning. Few substitutions. Pitchers had far more complete games because they had to. Ruth, would have hit even more home runs if the balls and bats of the time were more like ours today. He also was a pitcher to start of course which actually kept his early career at-bats lower. And also the ball itself was balkier and not as prone to rocketing as the newer ones. So, suffice it to say that we really can only surmise how BP might react to things. He would be pleased that it has survived and is a worldwide movement still.

IF, as what I have read regarding the Summit opening up to more than Scouts is accurate, and it draws, then what would stop a similar process at the other high adventure locations? As long as the Scouts get first position in bookings, it would seem a viable option. And, those properties I believe are more financially stable in that they have been in existence for a longer time.

I have been seeing shirts from this company off and on for a while now. One would think National is aware, though who knows?

All kibitzing aside. Until we get the more detailed info from National, we can only kick it back and forth. IF, note the caps, the CO is the ultimate decider, then we will see variants, but most likely could be compatible if people simply are not intimidated by other ideas and approaches. Maybe we should simply run with it as we, that is our individual units and districts, feel is best. But while running, be open to what might not be working and make adjustments. Ultimately, we either believe in the foundation of BSA, no matter what genders are involved, or we do not. Flexibility is key, but without blinders or unwillingness to find better ways when necessary.

As already noted, technically it should, though hopefully that is not the norm or only camping. These decisions are still the responsibility of the adults ultimately, though if the scouts were to weigh in against it, they would take that into account. The thin line again.