Bob White

The BSA does not require anyone to agree with all its policies or program, but they do require two things if you disagree. 1. You are required to follow the policies and program as they exist and as you agreed to do when you joined. 2. You are required to disagree in a constructive manner through the channels that exist in the BSA where your concerns can be addressed. If you do not follow the policies or if you disagree in a public manner and you detract from the delivery of the program you can and likely will have your membership revoked. As a member you are a guest in the house of the BSA. Do not expect to stand in the hosts home and insult them and expect to be welcome. You have a right to your opinion but BSA has a right to associate with people who share their same views. Your right to your opinion does not negate their right of free association. Membership is a privilege and a responsibility, not a right, and should be treated as such. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

What part isn't clear? The only way to get a merit badge counselor registered is if he/she fills out an application. A currently registered scouter needs a separate application because there is 1) no other way to register them. 2) No other paperwork to designate they are dual registered. 3) The process you have been given to follow. 4) Not all current scouters are counselors and not all counselors are currently leaders. Nor will they ever be. 4) Gets a criminal background check on ALL counselors. It has nothing to do with quietly screening anyone. That is wrong...forget it...stop bringing it up... move on.

Our junior leaders are trained to do two to a tent regardless of the capacity (unless its a 0ne-person tent:) ). The reason is a scout is courteous and we understand the nature of youth. A two person tent is going to settle much faster than a party tent with three or more. The only exception is winter camp. On an exceptionally cold night more bodies in a tent is warmer. I hope this helps. BW

Always go to the resources of the BSA first. The Cub Scout Leader Book and the uniform inspction sheet for adults both say that the Cub den Leader wears the hat of his/her Den.

1)What happened in 1974 was that he NAACP brought suit against the Mormon church and the BSA to get the Mormon church to stop discriminating based on race. Black Scouts were allowed membership but under the rules of the church could not hold certain church offices and so could not advance the same as white scouts. The LDS church changed their position before the case went to trial and all parties; The LDS Church, the BSA, and the NAACP, signed a document stating that the discrimination no longer existed.. So while yes there was a document signed in 1974, it was not an agreement between the NAACP and the BSA for the BSA to stop discriminating, since that was not the issue. It was an agreement that the racial discrimination in the LDS church as related to Scouting had ended. 2) No, and I think considering the scocial and political complexity of the topic that the BSA did everything it could to serve all youth regardless of race, and did far more than other organizations to work for racial equality.

Yeah, and I'm the Duke of York. Let's understand each other BP, I posted very politely, even complimenting you on your successes. Then you made some very misleading statements that are not supported by the facts, you took unwarranted cheap shots at the program and its professionals with broad generalizations that you have no way of statistically supporting. You claim that my actual numbers were wrong but gave no specifics as to what was wrong or what the right numbers were or what your sources are. Then you write me and threaten me with banishment from the board. You will learn I do not cave to verbal bullies nor do I suppose that the person who barks the loudest is in the right. If you cannot present some facts then your are just howling in the wind and I for one am not impressed. Eamonn identified the problem quite well. The Venturing program is fine in theory but has not been implemented well in any instance that I have seen so far. It relies too much on dual applications. Scout leaders who should have started Venture Patrols, instead started Venturing crews, dual registered their own scouts and created two weak units in place of one weak unit. I have talked with professionals and volunteers in several councils, the story changes very little. If BP you feel unable to discuss this topic without having a temper-tantrum and name calling then I think perhaps the problem is not sitting at my keyboard. And just to tie up any loose ends, Venturing didn't come a long time ago because we had Exploring, a nearly identical program that was removed from the traditional program venue and moved to the Learning for Life program. Venturing then replaced it so that we would have a coed program for older scouts in the traditional program grouping. And any professional in the BSA would have known that.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Just for the record Fuzzy, the current stat is just over 4.5% of scouts achieve Eagle, 30 years ago the stat was just under 3%. So basically the number of Eagles in 30 years has increased about 1.5%. The Eagle is easy to get? It doesn't show in the facts. The Eagle is easier to get? I am not sure that the facts support that opinion either with such a small increase in three decades. These are not secret numbers. The BSA publishes them often in reports and news releases. Hope this helps to dispel your concerns. BW

DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER! This is a great example of how not using BSA resources is harmful to your program. The link that Scoutldr recommends begins well enough quoting directly freom the Scout manuals (without saying that it a direct quote or ackowleding the specific resources since that would admit to a violation of copyright laws), But then it goes way off course. Even after it tells you that the BOR is not a place to retest, the example questions they use do infact retest. It also tells you that the scout is to appear in full uniform and after being introducesd by the BOR chair the scout is to come to attention and recite the Oath and Law. WHAT!!! Where is that required? It isn't. After starting off sounding official and knowledable of the BSA program the content of the site leaves the world of the BSA and enters the opinion or even worse "habit" of a single troop and presents it as BSA policy and procedure. If you want to learn the BSA program go to BSA resources. You can find sample questions on page 30-31 of the Troop Committee Guidebook. You will find the correct procedures for a Board of Review in the BSA's Advancement Committee Policies and Procedures manual both can be purchased at your local council service center. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I think it is a vitally important distinction Twocub when you realize that most organizations did not allow memberships other than white. And although there were segregated troops primarily in the South, integrated troops did exist. And by the 1960s many troops were integrated. The BSA has always given units great altitude in determining their own membership based on the their specific goals and needs, allowing them to be stricter than the BSA regulations but not less restrictive. The fact that integrated units existed at a very early time shows that the BSA did not block integration. Could they have been more aggressive. Perhaps, but it's easy to live in todays age and look back and say that things could have been better. Today you do not have the same climate that existed then. Racial segregation was a volatile and complicated issue. Considering the strides made at this time in race relations by the BSA they did an amazing job of quietly helping to spread integration and more importantly improve communications and understanding by bringing races together in the friendly arena of scouting. This issue of integration from decades ago is a smoke screen being used to attack the BSA on other forms of segregation. The BSA recognized from the onset that racial integration was in keeping with the values of the program and never took steps to hinder the continued growth of membership from a wide variety of heritages. But to compare this with the BSA's discrimination of atheists or avowed homosexuals would be a mistake. Those areas are in conflict with the methods and aims of scouting and the BSA has made that abundantly clear.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Absolutely. In fact that would be preferred. They have the same right to walk away from the BSA as the BSA has to walk away from them. Each should do so as quickly as possible.

"The requirements don't need to be objective and quantifiable..there are lots of MB requirements that say merely, "discuss with your counselor" or "write a report", or "find a community (religious) leader and interview them". I never said objective, although most merit badge requirements are, but of course they would have to be specific and quantitative. Sure you can say discus with your counselor. But discuss what? At some point you have to have a requirement for what will be discussed that fits every scout trying to obtain the merit badge. What specifc reqirements could cover every possible religion and belief? It has to be measurable or how would either the scout or the counselor know when the requirement is satisfied. I sincerely think it was a good start i just not sure it can be accomplished. It is too broad a topic to be standardized. That is why the bsa uses such a liberal definition and does not place any religion above another, but places all reverence over none at all. Perhaps there is a simpler way?

"As a practical matter, one rarely has more than one person interested in the committee chair job," Scouting tip #247 Never select a volunteer by who wants the job. Always seek the person you want for the job. The COR as explained in the Committee Guide serves as head of the "scouting Department" in the organization. In addition you will find the insrtruction that the COR and IH select the Committee Chair is in the Troop Committee Challenge basic training for committee members.

Fuzzy, Just how easy is Eagle to reach if more than 95% of the Scouts never achieve it? If it was easy shouldn't that number be closerto 50%?

BP First, since its beginnings to the late sixties scouting was at a national high of over 5 million, since the 1970's the numbers of scouts has dropped by more than half and the movement has never been that high again. Oh yes, the magic of math. The numbers pre-1970 include Exploring, a program that is no longer counted in the tradition statistics of the BSA today, yet those youth still exist, but are counted in Learning For Life. The other problem is population density. The peak years included the Baby Boomer crowd who are now all adult leader age. Care to look at the number of available youth today compared to 1970 and then add in Learning for Life? You will see that the BSA on average actually serves as large or larger percentage of available youth. Could we be bigger? I think so, if more units offered the program promised the youth in the Boy Scout Handbook. Check out the figures compiled on scouting programs around the world by WOSM. Except for Indonesia where the program membership, as it was explained to me, is a part of the school system, so every eligible youth is a scout, the BSA leads the worls in percentage of available youth in Scouting. And except for Indonesia the BSA has had the most consistantly strong membership of any country. As a professional or even as an experienced scouter you would also know that many countries (especially in former soviet territories and third world countries) depend on the BSA for financial support and resources in order to continue to provide scouting. "Second, the reason councils are going out is because funds being collected on financial campaigns have been dropping dramatically over the last five years" Once again a local problem. Many councils including this one is raising more money than ever before. "Case in point the council in Seattle is taking 15% of the income from Sea Scout Regattas, etc. to cover their administative costs" Wait a minute...I thought you said you had been a professional. If that is true you would know that is a common practice in all councils, and you would understand why that budget item exists and what it accounts for. " Thirdly, let me tell you what DE's at National are taught, how to "squeeze prominent business people in your district to get them to give up the most money possible", how to "manipulate volunteers to get them to do what you want", and "how to create units quickly", without securing the necessary leaders or number of scouts for a viable unit. Then they told us that it is policy for DE's to be transferred to new councils every three years because they will usually wind up being unsucessful after that time ,their district resources will be all dried up and a new DE has to develop new sources since the prior ones are left feeling used and angry." Well that explains two things. 1. You might have been an employee of the BSA, MAYBE! But you sure weren't a professional. 2. It explains why you "used to be" with the BSA. "most councils go under because they stop delivering program and the parents pull their kids, and the scouters in a council stop supporting it financially." So you think that volunteers did such a bad job of delivering the program that they stopped donating money to their organization for them to use themselves to deliver a better program? Now you have me convinced that you are not a unit volunteer, or a professional, because you do not understand either side of the program. Which specific stats that I have presented do you challenge? Because I would be happy to send you to any number of resources to back them up. (This message has been edited by Bob White)

I have two Proof editions of the Air Scout manual. I picked them up at garage sales and at book shops.

In fact TwoCub further research would help you to discover that BSA units, even in the deep south, especially in the rural areas were segregated decades before and that by the the late 1960s the number of black youth in scouting was equally proportionate to the number of white scouts according to population, and most were in integrated troops. Too much of this thread is based on idividuals with strong opinions but few facts, who are guessing at what the history of the program was without any experience or bothering to research it.

There really is too much to cover here KS. Boy Scout roundable eng=hancement is a week long conference at Philmont Training Center. Until you go there I recommend you get the basic Roundtable Commissioner Training and the Roundtable Staff Development Trainng Syllabi. A good staff is essential whether large or small. More important than group size is quality and characteristics. Choose your staff carefully. Keep in mind the goal of RT is not as a District Activities Committee planning night or as an announcemet night. Your job is to influence and increase the opportunity for every eleigble youth to experience a quality scouting program by affecting the unit leaders "Will to Do" and "Skill to DO". It's a terrific job. A good Roundtable can have a huge impact on the quality of Scouting in your community. Along with Cubmaster and Scoutmaster it's one of my personal favorites. Good Luck,

I agree that the Troop Committee Guidebook is a primary resource for Committee operation. "As far as I can tell, the Guidebook is silent on the subject of selection of the committee chair." It is? Page 7 under the heading Chartered Organization "Each chartered organization using the Scouting program provides a meeting place, selects a Scoutmaster, appoints a troop committee of at least three adults, and chooses a chartered organization representative. On the same page under the responsibilities of the Charter Organization Representative, the Troop Committee Guidebook says that the COR.... "Secures a Committee Chairperson." You will find the committee responsibilities on page 13. Nowhere in the list of committee responsibilities does it say the committee chooses a chairperson.

Not a bad start scoutldr, now the next step. What quantitative requirements or measurements could you put into it to: A) determine that the counselor was qualified and capable B) outline standard requirements to do that the merit badge was not dependent on the counselor to determine what requirements needed to be met and what the measurement of "met" would be. By doing this it would meet the same criteria as all other merit badges.

TwoCub would you agree that councils and units had integrated long before that date?

Actually it falls to the Chartered Organization's Institutional Head or Charetr Organization Representative to select and approve the Committee Chair. The IH or COR can consider a candidate recommended by the committee if they want to.

But Hunt, Not all Merit Badge Counselors are unit leaders, and not all unit leaders have had criminal background checks due to the fact that background checks were not always mandated. So the easiest way to achieve the goal of getting all merit badge counselors registered and checked is to require all merit badge counselors to register on the new applications. What is the difficulty in understanding this?

BP writes "As all of you have seen recently Scouting has been diminishing these last 15-20 years." Nationally the traditional programs of the BSA diminished by a mere 2% in 2004 compared to its 2003 stats. But isn't this largely a local problem? Many councils in the coumtry are thriving. The council I am in for instance had a 16% increase in membership this year. And there were other Councils that had even larger increases. Councils are folding or being absorbed, and the services from Dist. Execs. and councils seem non exsistant. Again localized problems. Financial problems of councils are more likely caused by the financial woes of a community and seldom related to the Scouting program itself. The fact that adjoining councils are able to expand their service, often taking on and satisfying the other councils debt shows that this is a localized situation and not program related. I was a DE for three years and I was always at every district event and Eagle Board of Review and Ceremony representing the council. Nowadays most units don't even know who their DE is or what they do. Thats a shame, and it speaks more to the lack of training than to the condition of the professional services. How can you attend New Leader essentials and not know what a DE does? Also I would love to see the statistics you base that conclusion on. There are well over a quarter of a million units in the BSA, how could you possibly know that most do not know their DE? "It saddens me that all DE's do now is raise money and try to keep units from folding, many of them with no experience in scouting or understanding of the programs. As a DE, certainly you were taught the 3-Ms of professional scouting? Isn't it Money, Manpower and Membership? That is their job, and has been since 1916, why be sorry about that? Why should they not know the program? They get training. And again, this is a local program, many professionals as you know were scouts and scout leaders, including you. The three pros in the district I serve for instance are all Eagle Scouts. As far as membership there are over 110-million youth who have been in scouting and currently there are over 3.2 million being served (not counting Learning for Life and Exploring), by nearly 1.5 million volunteers. You would be hard pressed to find other organizations serving as many youth each week all year long as the BSA does. The 4-H Clubs come the closest and their membership has decline more over the past ten years than the BSA has.

KA6BSA is correct. In fact the four-in-hand knot, as it was called, was a Bear requirement back in the mid 60's when I was a Cub.

NO, it is not to get background checks on previously registered unit leaders. If they wanted that they would just require that. What the BSA wants is a registration and background check on all merit badge counselors. Hence the requirement for all merit badge counselors to be registered. It really is just that simple.