Bob White

dana, bring back CAW if you like but again what do expect it to do. Change a boring crew program? How Dana? They are just words. A catch phrase. It takes action and leadership to change a program. You seem to be fishing for a magic word that will fix a problem. Not all crews have boring programs Dana. They all use the same guide book. The difference is in the people who lead them and their ability to coach and memntor the youth members into action. There are no quick fixes to a unit in trouble other than using the tools you have been given. Stop looking for a remedy outside of the Venturing program and follow the program that has been given you and you will have your best chance of success.

"We should all admit several things: This is going to be interesting! There are a limited number of willing and able volunteers in any area at any time. True, but you have no idea what that number is. Until you know every individuals skills, goals and interests, and ask each one personallyto take part in a scouting position that appeals to their personal goals, you don't know what that number is. So, 100% of the adult population is a potential scout leader. How many have you invited this week? The professionals have only limited time and must therefore budget their efforts. Actually most professionals spend far more hours a week in scout related activities than any volunteer does. Professions have different specific goals than unit leaders and so need volunteers to do the job they volunteered to do so that the pros can do the job they are paid to do. There are only a limited number of youth with any interest in the Scouting program in any given area. And again unless you know what motivates each individual youth, their needs and characteristics, you have no idea what that number is. 100% of the eligible youth population could be scouts. How many have you asked this week. The Scouting program is a franchised educational system used by and offered to ANY qualified Charter organization that wants to use scouting to reach youth they serve or the community in general. Whether or not there are enough youth to support the unit is the concern of the CO not the Scouting volunteer. Whether the CO wants to serve 5 or 50 they is irrelevent to the responsibility of the Volunteers. Very small units cannot deliver the complete Scouting program affectively due to the limitations on resources. Smaller groups require less resources Delivering the program is about good leadership skills and following the program. You can have a good troop of 8 as easily as 28. Ultra large units can also be a problem, because Scouts can become lost, and only the most capable adult leaders can manage such a large group. Only capable adult leaders can manage ANY SIZE scout unit. There is a place in Scouting for new units, and for small units, but in general, I think: Here we go again More units doesn't mean more Scouts. Experience and numbers to not support that opinion I have served on District level for over 20 years and when unit numbers raise youth numbers rise EVERY TIME. More units doesn't mean more Scouters. Mathematics is your against you here. It takes a minimum of 5 to 9 adults every time you charter a unit. So mathematically, more units always increases the number of scouters. More units doesn't mean more Scouting. Actually that is not accurate either. More units doesn't mean better Scouting. Absolutely true. Better leaders make better scouting. They come from thoughtful leader selection, training, following the program. The Unit Leaders #! responsibility is to deliver a quality scouting program. They should not be worrying about how many units exist noe or next week or how many scouts are in the unit. They need to keep the promise. I believe that the highest quality Scouting program should be delivered to the largest number of youth possible. Absolutely not!!! The highest quality Scouting program should be delivered to EVERY youth possible. I also believe that this can often be achieved more affectively if institutions worked together to deliver an effective program, That's what the District and Council committees are. and district Scouters provided more recruiting assistance and support to existing units. That is part of what the District and Council committees do. But we are also the ones working to insure the health and growth of scouting in our communities for the future. It's the Big Picture job. Bob White

Barry, I don't know where you got me saying anything about the either program being a failure. I made it clear I thought that if a scout wanted to do something different, more power to him. But the mission of Venturing and the mission of scouting are the same. As the unit leader my job is to have the scout unit I serve be "the best show in town". if a scout needs to get his scouting from another source then the program hasn't failed, I have as the leader of the program. A Venture Patrol is nearly identical to a Venturing Crew in mostly of its program activities. It is the same a s a scout transferring to another troop to do more stuff. if He isn't getting enough activities in this troop he should go to another troop and shame on me for not keeping the promise of scouting. Venturing is a great program but it is an unneeded activity for scouts in a troop program that is following the program. And while you think I am wrong neither the BSA or I do, so lets just say I see it differently than you.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

OK Dana, (deep breath) to be absolutely fair I looked at the sight, wathched the PowerPoints, read some articles, and NO WONDER they became a Venture Crew. Did you read the information at that sight Dana? THERE IS NO ROVER PROGRAM. They have no organization, they have no centralized support. They have only the guidebook they wrote, they have no advancement program, no recognitions except antiques that they have to search for. THERE IS NO U.S. ROVER PROGRAM. Their goals of the ideals of scouting, skills, and service, are no different than Venturing. They base their program on the writings of Dan Beard, they have no connection to the Rover programs in the other countries they list (except as Pen Pals) who all use the UK program and have no connection to Beard. Beard was a designer of the US Scouting program. They adopted Venturing because it had everything their unit lacked, organization, connection to scouting, recognitions, advancement, camps, insurance, shared goals. You have yet to identify a single concrete advantage or an element that Rovers have that Venturing doesn't. Now I see why. What I don't get is how you think this would solve the inability of a leader to lead a Venturing program. and PLEASE just press the enter button ONCE when you are ready to post.

First Dana, your Link doesn't work. Second, If you can't give me in a half dozen posts a single specific feature that Rovers has that Venturing doesn't, then how will ever be able to explain it to youth who you say 'don't get' Venturing? Remember that the Rover group you site were Rovers first and then became a Venturing crew. So it would seem to me that they found more in Venturing then Rovers had. So why do you want to go in reverse? So far it makes no sense and you have not offered any specifics to support your position.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Smoke and mirrors Dana, your talking fluff. What specific "thing" does the crew need from Rovers that they cannot do in Venturing without Rovers? Venturing can deliver an outdoor and service program, it already has that as a core of the program. Venturing has the Nuts and Bolts of Scouting in it. Youth Lead, Outdoors, character, citizenship and fitness development. Venturing is for older youth too, and even if you layered in Rovering the participants would have to leave by their 22nd birthday. They would not be allowed to stay to 26. Scouting is international already they don't' need a dual program for that. If you can't instill spirit in Venturing using nearly 100 years of scouting heritage that exists already how will adding a UK program accomplish it? "I am not saying Venturing does not have that, just many crews need it." Dana, read what you wrote... If crews need it and Venturing has it then the problem is the leadership doesn't know how to do it, if they can't make Venturing work why should they be able to make Rovers work? "The way Venturing is set up the crew could miss out on it." You have yet to give a single concrete explanation to support this statement. How is Venturing set-up so that crews miss out on anything?

Dana define the "Rovering specialty". What is in the Rovering program that isn't already part of Venturing. Be specific. When I asked this before you said "nothing". So how is nothing going to make it work better or be more exciting?

Dana, Think this through, if its the same people, how will the quality of the leadership change by giving them a different name? Venturers calling themselves ROVERS will have exactly the same program opportunities they have as Venturers. If they aren't choosing to make plans now to do stuff, giving them another name won't change anything. If you are a Venturing Advisor or Commissioner you are supposed to be teaching the scouts to do the VENTURING program, What doesn't the current program allow the Scouts to do that you need another program added on would do. You said it yourselfright answer before. NOTHING. Why not just teach them how to do the program you have?

Dana, If the advisor can't get one unit to work, how are they going to make two work? IS there not already of program opportunities and activity choises available in Venturing? Several advancement and recognition opportuites? Guidleines, training anmd program supports? Sure there are! If your no good at baking a cake how is trying to make cookise and cake together going to make you any better? The solution to a Venturing Crew's problems isn't to have another program layered on to it, It needs better leadership. Nothing else will solve the problems you sited. Do the program well and the members will stay.

So again Dana, How specifically does it enhance the BSA Venture program, if by your own statement there is no difference. Why do you want to take BSA members and enroll them in a different program if it does nothing different? explain how they will learn more about scouting from a program that is not part of the BSA? The Link you gave is to a program thet NO LONGER EXISTS! Why are you looking for ways to reinvent a perfectly good wheel? (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Gotta go with eamonn. The leadership skills stays constant no matter what the task. The leadership skills I use in the unit are the same ones I use at roundtable, work and home. I do not get what you are after. What are learning objectives you want to accomplish?

Actually the requirements of the BSA Congressional charter, a goal of the BSA program, the purpose of District Committees, and the mission of Commissioning, is to be spreading the scouting program. As a Unit leader you should be unconcerned with how many organizations want to use scouting as their youth education program. You focus is supposed to be your next meeting. While Unit leader serve a single Unit every else I mentioned is working in the backgound to spread the mission of scouting. Everyone who wears the Wreath of Service has been given a responsibility to insure that every eligible youth has an opportunity to belong to a quality scouting program. For that to happen any eligible organization that we can spread scouting to is going to get a scout unit or units. For quality scouting to happen for every eligible youth we will be involved in raising the funding needed to secure the future of the program in the community we serve. Because they are charged with that mission they are involved in recruiting and training more adult volunteers nd providing program support with Roundtables, Day camps, Summer Camps, and other District and Council events. Unit Leaders primary responsibility is service to the Unit they are in. But there are people charged with a much broader responsibility and they deserve more respect than they are given by scouters who complain about work they are not responsible for doing. It is not a matter of which is better, a large troop or several small troops as the title implies, it is a matter of what does it take to get the program out to EVERY ELIGIBLE YOUTH and serves the organizations who want to use the scouting program.

So Louie have you been involved with your son in scouting since Tigers?

When they said they wanted to advance in rank but did not want a position of responsibility, did they say anything when you told them that in order to advance they had to serve? If they chose not to serve then thats their choice. A boy doesn't have to advance to be a scout. You have a program responsibility to direct a scout to 1st Class. But Star Life and Eagle are designed for the Scout to determine on his own. Focus on training Junior Leaders.

John, You have misunderstood the policy. First if you look in the Scoutmasters Handbook, pages 142-144 you will see that the Venture Patrol has the same program availability and recognitions as Varsity Scouting and can take part in any activity approved for Varity teams. Next your statement on SCUBA participation is incorrect. Any scouts certified in SCUBA can SCUBA under certain conditions except for Cub Scouts. SCUBA training courses however are limited to Varsity Teams(and therfore Venture Patrol) and Venturing Crews for members 14 years of age and older. You are correct that Varsity Teams and Venture patrols cannot hunt, or shoot handguns. But I know of no Venture crews that have hunting as their sole program, and the handguns are limited specifically to law enforcemnt crews so not even all Venturing units can do that either. I maintain that as long as a troop is maintaining the interest and growth of a scout there is no reason to promote that they join Venturing until they are 18.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Acco40, as far as the committee members go, as the scouytmaster, they are not your responsibility. It is up to the Committee chair to get the committee to function properly. You can hint, you can suggest, but you have other responsibilities and they do not include developing the committee. Talk to the committee chair, explain why it would be advantageous for the committee to be uniformed, it is the Committee chair's job to develop committee members.

Page 12-11 of the Cub Scout Leader Book, under the heading How to Wear the Uniform "Uniform parts should not be worn separately or with civilian clothing. The entire uniform should be worn or not at all. The pack does not have the authority to make changes to the uniform" Page 12-3 under The Cub Scout Uniform "VArious other types of Cub Scout garments are available, such as t-shirts, sweatshirts and red patch vests. These items are not considered part of the official uniform. Please note that individual uniform parts are not to be worn with civilian clothes." This does not appear in the Scoutmaster handbook for a couple of reasons. One is that if the Cub Scout unit follows the uniform policies correctly, then uniforming will not be an issue as the Webelos will already be in full uniform when they crossover. Remember over 80% of Boy Scout membership comes form Cub Scouting. The second reason is that troop scouting has the option of an activity uniform which allows for the mixing of official BSA uniform pieces with unofficial scouting themed clothing, in specifc combinations. Bob White (This message has been edited by Bob White)

Is anyone else familiar with the passage I wrote of?

Dana a couple of questions. What does Venturing gain by combining it with either the long retired BSA rover program or the UK rover program? What could a Venturing Ccrew not do as a Venture Crew that it could do as a Rover Crew?

Trail Day, The BSA has not been designated a religion as you have stated, it is a religious organization. There is a big difference. Judiasm is a religion, Knights of Columbus is a religious organization. Merlyn, Consider this. Isaac Asimov's employment by the Boys' Life Magazine (along with Bobby Fisher's, who if memory serves was is also an atheist) only proves that the BSA is not intolerant toward athiests. They simply are not accepted for membership since their non-belief is in direct opposition to the tenets of the progam. The fact that Asimov can write and Fisher can play chess, may suit them as guest authors it does not mean they would be suitable leaders.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

Congrats, Hurray back to Gilwell. Bob White

Did you know that in a couple places in the Cub Scout Leader Handbook it says that if you are are not going to wear the entire uniform it would be better to not wear the uniform at all?

It really varies. In the Houston Metro area scouting is hugely popular. But here in the midwest in a mostly rural community our membership rose 16% this year while the nation on average stayed the same or had a slight decline. Scouting will be as strong in your community as you decide to make it. If units don't keep the promise of scouting, If volunteers don't support FOS and Popcorn Sales, If you don't help your DE to bring new Chartering Organizations into the scouting family, If Troops don't recruit and retain Webelos, If leaders don't get training, then scouting in your community will suffer.(This message has been edited by Bob White)

I am a little confused. What exactly is the topic? is it advanced leadership skills, Roundtable administration, Roundtable program? I'm not sure what your objective is.

sst3rd I was not suggesting it was a contest. I was explaining that it was a process, and that membership does not take place until the end of the process. One thing that you should know from this forum is that you cannot assume that what is "usual" for one unit is not usual for all. I have seen a number of scouts be nominated for the OA and never make it to an ordeal. I have seen some scouts not pass the ordeal. It happens.(This message has been edited by Bob White)