Tampa Turtle

I think we have a winner.

I am using it on PC; it is OK...no biggie.

I cannot, in good conscientious, blame the Woodbadgers alone. My Methodist Church does the same thing, my kid does it if he is pitching a new purchase to his Mom, power point like presentations are everywhere. I would give a boy extra points if he used sock puppets at this point.

First Tiger Cub sock lost at campout. First time 'invisible bench' skit was presented at a campfire. First un-staked tent in a lake. First time 'Scout-Juice' smuggled on a campout. First claim of 'Beaver Shark' sighting.

"We have met the enemy and they is us". I am as guilty as anyone else and while trying to be helpful short-circuited what was occurring organically.

Boy Scout Troops, Patrols etc are fascinating laboratories in human organization; I think I learned more in hands-on scouts than most of the very expensive training my employers paid for.

Smart split from the original thread Moderator. I digress too much in face to face conversation as well.

I agree that the problem(s) seem both logistical and cultural. I concur that this fat little Turtle should not go on some hikes with fast mover teenagers; in fact I may be a liability no matter what my desire may be. So I often hike with the Newbies...I can still beat an 11 year old LOL. Eagle 94-A1 we have done similar things as well, sometimes we had two crews, a senior and junior, moving in opposite directions and crossing near the mid-point. Anyway...

Oh good lord please do not reference Management training. BLEECH! You just ask some questions to your self, fellow scouters, or other scouts: Start with do they appear to be progressing in the scout law? Are the boys having fun? Are they passive or engaged? Are they jumping up and doing things themselves or are they waiting on direction? Do scouts start things on their own or are they waiting on adult prompting? Do they laugh at meetings? Do they seem glad to see each other? How is attendance? If they have time conflicts do they tell anybody or propose workarounds? Are they advancing at their own pace or are there artificial obstacles? Do they show pride in showing off scout skills like knots or putting up a tent or is it just perfunctory? Do they show interest on non-Eagle required merit badges? Is their strong patrol identity, pride, or competitiveness? Do the patrols have different personalities? Are they protective of their Patrol equipment? Do they want their own Patrol area away from adults at campouts? Do they plan, cook, and clean up for themselves at campouts? Are they willing to buck the adults when they feel it is important and the adult is violating the Scout Law? Do older boys tolerate the younger ones and do enough older ones seem genuinely helpful? Do they teach other informally or only as an EDGE requirement. Do they have their scout book with them and does it look like it actually been used. Do they approach adults for sign offs? Do they suggest additional activities such as patrol get togethers or hanging out outside of scouts? Do they tell tall tales of the worst campout ever? Do they pass on Troop lore from before there time? Do scouts and scouters have organic nick names? All of these admittedly and subjective benchmarks point to the health of a troop.

We did do that, every year. I KNOW all that! Weekly training backpacking hikes (lots of stairs because it is flat here) and you had to do 2 out of 3 field hike with the equipment you were taking. This was the rules that the boys made and we had used for a while. But we had some Mom's, who had lots of day hike experience but not backpacking, work their way into the AT trip at the last minute and they were not just not ready. The Boys are not going to tell an adult they cannot go. The SM should have been willing to be the bad guy but caved to keep the peace. On the AT the newbies could not just leave them behind so the whole crew suffered. I wish that previous SM had put his foot down but he was a bit of a soft touch more concerned with his Woodbadge class to be honest. Keeping up quality control is always difficult but harder when attitudes are changing. The younger boys are less interested in the outdoor program and their parents assert pressure. When the program gets watered down the older boys who are staying in because they have self selected themselves to do the outdoor program start to disengage. ...BUT to pull this thread back on track...what I think SOME of it represents is IF BSA is going to inject new things like BSA4G and 'Family Camping' THEN they need to DOUBLE DOWN on the traditional, outdoor oriented, mixed age patrol, youth led method or Scouting will lose it's way as some experienced folks leave (as I am seeing locally) and they are replaced by less experienced new folks.

Wisconsin, the problem is that the Troop cannot support two different hikes logistically up to the AT each summer. (we have had two crews a hard/easy before but it has proved harder in recent years to pull it off) The newer/weaker hikers want to scab on to the more ambitious program because they just do not have the skills/confidence to do it themselves but instead of planning to work up to it lobby to water down the entire hike to the point that the hard core hikers loose interest. The SM should set up boundaries but is adverse to causing bad parental karma and in a way the problem solved itself because the only ones left want an easy 'family friendly' hike. And when the older boys starting bailing out of an activity or the program it should be a warning sign, shouldn't it. I am aware that one needs skills between running the program and keeping parents happy--I have been doing this 10 years but up to a couple years ago most folks understood the program was what the program was. I was the 'new parent' trainer. In the past you wanted to go on certain trips you had to earn the right to go through training, practice, and skills now the attitude has changed. Too many cub scout attitudes creeping in emphasizing fun over adventure.

Qwaze, I agree with your points and we used to do all that. I did that, I had to work hard 6 years ago to train and earn my stripes. At some point, and well before BSA started talking about 'Family Camping' we slipped up and started letting almost any parents join in some of the activities. While I think the intent was well meaning more than one carefully planned adventure was ended early when a participant-often a parent-was not up to the challenge. It has been smelling like Webelos 3 for a while. The SM talks a good Boy Led game but what I keep seeing is that the key Boy Leaders are being heavily coached "On the right way" by their parents to be leading the Troop which seems to be (a) managements style leadership training, (b) focus on rapid advancement toward Eagle, and (c) easy camp outs. Because this what the boys are saying the SM (who is an old school experienced scouter, Eagle, OA Vigel and all that) says that is what they will do even if they fail. It seems more like a suicide pact to me with the way they are shedding some of the best scouts so fast. I have been quite persistent in expressing my concerns to the SM and CC who seem to agree with me. I am becoming an interesting but old school curiosity at the Troop.

At the Troop meeting last night it was interesting to observe some of the reactions from the decision seeping into the Troop. A number of the Mom's of the younger to middle scouts were saying they thought it was great that females would be more welcome in the program. (OK so far). At that point there was a leap that Mom's could now be more welcome at the campouts as visitors. Three of them said that they wanted to go on the annual AT hike with their 11 to 13 year old sons and lobbied the Committee Chair that since the boys were young and the moms were fairly new hikers could they plan an easier trip for next summer. They were very excited. (I though "uh-oh") When the news of this quietly spread later in the evening five of six of the most senior boys (most have 300 miles of backpacking) pulled their names from the sign up list. I overheard one saying "the adults are watering things down and making it too easy". (The AT hike has generally been an annual rite of passage-younger guys have to do a lot of practice hikes to show they are up to it- and the last year the trip was shortened by a day when the Troop relented and let a younger guy go who was not ready but the mom (who was also not ready) insisted she go to help him --it did not set a good precedent). A mom told her son he was being a bad sport and that the point of the AT hike should be on making more the beauty of the wilderness accessible to everyone versus some kind of endurance test. (This directly conflicted with the boys who like to plan a hike that has some challenges -- they are also brutal in their recommendations to specific Dad's needs to get in shape if they are going) My son (who just aged out) did not say a thing but later at home said "I am not sure what is going on but after hearing all the mom's I do not think we hit bottom yet". (He actually supports girls in scouts BTW). He did say Mom's and Dad's seem to approach things (injuries, missed equipment, conflicts) differently. Despite my efforts to explain the OFFICIAL position on what BSA has said (I would like to encourage him to stay engaged) he is INTERPRETING the recent announcement (along with things like Merit Badge Academies) as "making Boy Scouts more like Girl Scouts". Three boys asked a dad if he would be willing to do a 'real' hiking trip outside of scouts over spring break. There was some renewed interest in Philmont. On the upside some of the more sluggish Life Scouts seem to be in over-drive to work on remaining requirements so they can "hurry and get out sooner". I knew this year would be a struggle "a rebuilding year" as the Troop seems to go up and down as there is Scout, Parent, and Scout turnover but the recent change seemed to hit us at a bad point. I sense we are going to lose many of our middle and older boys. There are a lot of reasons for that--to be honest many of the boys who are matriculating up seem to want less adventure and more classroom style scouting focused on advancement -- there is a cultural issue going on. But I fear what we are losing are those boys who would really benefit from a less 'school like' atmosphere and that 'adventurous image' of the BSA brand is an easier sell for those boys when it is an entry to the male world. It was extremely useful for my two sons who needed the outlet and achievement and channeled male crudity to get them through a rough patch, I am hoping that program will still be available for other boys.

I thought some of the comments on the video like the one "what can I do this year to integrate girls to my troop" was exactly what some folks were concerned about. Those folks will be lauded by National for rolling things out ahead of time and if some girls get credits for camping outside of BSA they will look the other way if it produces a feel good story.

In my limited Scouter career this has been mentioned to me at least four times by single mothers of boys as a primary reason they put their son in scouts.

All good threads come to an end of their natural life usually marked by some incoherent comment by me--perhaps I am one of the four horseman of the thread-pocalypse. I would wager 'teletubbies' a fellow rider.

Sorry for muddying the waters...back to the regular program.

No kidding but it always gets volunteered AFTER they are already there and the tent is up. I do not miss the "tent ghettos" of our Pack of 150 family campouts. There were always a few couples who 'performed for the crowd' behind thin tent walls. Awkward.

We try to bring them just in case though no one has ever looked at them, ever. The book on the other hand has been browsed at a couple time.

My real world experience in Cub Scouts is Grandparents, Uncles, Aunts, "Friends with Benefits" (even had a former scouter neighbor) show up on family campouts not always the classic nuclear family implied in a term like 'Family Camping'. It gets messy.

(My OA Lodge already has a number of women and it is not that big a deal.) I just don't want OA to create a mess that will strain the love-hate relationship between OA and BSA National.

I think if they leave this at the Lodge level there will be uneven and possibly discriminatory behavior that will blow back toward OA...I hope for a uniform and fair set of guidelines from National. If asked I would be opposed to any 'camping credit' towards a candidate who camped outside a BSA organization.

Perhaps the issue is a lot of us are very sensitive to what National is saying and National is not very precise in it their terms. But, regardless of what National is TRYING to say, in our Troop I have observed two conclusions (and frankly I do not want to talk about it there because I get my fill here): 1- The adults for the most part think Boy Scout Troops will have boys and girls in it either has boy and girl patrols or mixed gender patrols. They think this is two years away. This has been reinforced by Media coverage and GSUSA comments. 2- The boys, who are mixed on the girl issue, are thinking that we will be required to have "Family type" campouts (whatever that means) and Boy Scouts will be like Cub Scout campouts.

Then we get into the additional issues and expense of fencing off limited access areas...it can be a mess.

We found we needed to ease them into it, leaders included.