DuctTape

deleted...

I agree. Those in the role of making changes to literature and program need to be acutely aware of how it affects the scouts. 50% of their time should be in this capacity outside of their office and in the field. All should also be required to complete Scout to FC requirements, all of them not just the "options".

Really good multi-dish foods are not exclusive to front-country camping. I, too, was often the camp chef (and still most of the time). Doing more with less is a skill, by definition one doesn't need as much to do a lot. With a small patrol and each person carrying a little, that allows for many combinations of minimal gear. The difference is planning and taking only what is needed, not everything.

Will light a small ceremonial campfire when I get home tonight. As the smoke rises, it will be in memory of this scout and others.

Ownership is the incorrect word. The CO does not own the unit. The unit is chartered to the CO. The CO owns the assets of the unit, however the unit is still a BSA unit. The CO does not have the authority to add or subtract to the requirements for advancement. The CO might not provide a good program but that is quite different.

thread drift... I SMH when I see restriction like no camping under 32 deg. Below freezing with snow is much safer than 40s and rain. Those who make rules like that typically have little experience. While safety is of primary concern, restrictions like temp threshold give adults false impressions of safety. Knowledge, skill and experience are necessary, not artificial temperature restrictions. /drift.

I am also in the NE, and we tent year-round. There is no such thing as indoor camping. One doesn't just camp in perfect conditions. Rain, snow, ice, cold, heat, bugs, etc... One of the reasons to do it all is for the boys to learn to do things for themselves and others. To insulate the boys from these experiences hampers their growth and denies them the adventure. Scouting IS an outdoor program.

I find it interesting that many are suggesting that BSA should be careful to not piss off religious COs, yet that is exactly what happened a few decades ago when the religious COs pushed the BSA to back policies which drove away other non-religious COs like PTAs, and public schools. Of course the majority of present COs are religious orgs at present, they couldn't fathom that other COs didn't follow the same religious code, and forced the BSA to kick out scouts of other non-religious COs. Yeah, we harken to the good ole days, back when gays and atheists were in scouts and no one made a big deal about it. We harken to the days before the zealots told our COs that we weren't allowed to have certain scouts and scouters in our troops. Now the pendulum is swinging back, the religious COs can still prohibit whomever they want, but at least they can't tell my CO who to bar from membership. /rant

I agree with Col Flagg, not only does that not fit the spirit it also belies the promise of adventure. One misses the entire point of all the badges, awards, ranks etc... when the goal is the badge, award, and rank. Some wonder why boys get bored with scouting after a few years, I suggest it is primarily a result of lack of adventure, in other words been there done that. If we encourage adventure and the joy of discovery whether it is a new plant, new constellation, new camping destination, new food to be cooked, new way of lighting a fire, etc... then the complaint ceases to be boredom.

I am likely a lone voice with my opinion, but I would rather see more civic orgs, and other "friends of" orgs as COs instead of religious groups using bsa as a tool to recruit for their congregation or as their own "youth group". Either the Org holds the Charter to further the mission of BSA, but not using BSA to further your own mission. In my opinion, that is/was the crux of the problem. I am sure I am alone in this opinion, but that is ok. I am used to it.

I would not object to this idea. However I would rather see more mb's have pre-requisites to differentiate between the introductory mbs and more advanced ones. I would suggest that the more advanced ones NOT be required, except as options.

We used to have scouting programs with public schools as chartering orgs, some COs were PTAs. My troop still met at a public school with a "friends of xxx" as the CO. My current troop has a local civic org as the CO, yet we still meet at a local public school and use the school's facilities just like any other community organization.

This response to my query about the troop owning the project has me even more confused. Would it be possible to elaborate?

It sounds like you already know what you will do. My only question, which does not really affect your decision is... How does a troop "own a project"?

In general troop meetings are not where merit badges get done. The troop meeting is planned and implemented by the scouts. If they are bored at meetings, it is because they aren't planning anything. Merit badges are (supposed to be) done by individual scouts or with a buddy. Sometimes they might demonstrate what they are doing at a troop or patrol meeting.

I recall my first time going to summer camp as a Scouter. I looked at the schedule and realized there was nothing for me to do as the boys were all at their activities. I called my dad and asked him what he used to do when we were all at our activities. He said, "I went fishing." I packed my rod&reel.

Difficult? Yes! But that is our mission. One can either find reasons for future failure, or seek solutions for success.

If the mission of the BSA is to prepare young people to make ethical choices... lamenting over parents who not bring theirchild to scouts with these skills seems a bit misplaced. That is our mission, of course it is easier if we have no work to do. But if a scout is not brought up in a way to help them grow into a young person able to make ethical choices... heck that is why we exist. If all parents already did it, bsa would not be necessary according to our mission. Now whether our mission is misguided... that is a whole 'nother can of beans.

These are toys. They were designed as toys, received a patent as toys and are used as toys. Some marketing genius figured he/she could promote them as a way to help kids focus. There are some medical pros who encourage this too. However beneficial these toys might be for the small minority of kids, the reality is almost every kid has one and are using them for fun and enjoyment, thus being used as designed as a toy. All that said, in my opinion this is no different than the phone thread. I do not think any item should be banned by adults (or PLC) unless a direct safety issue is evident. A patrol should have activities which make the items either part of the activity, or useless in the activity. The boys decide what gear is needed.

I was exploring an area of wilderness a few years ago where trails no longer existed except on old maps. I like to try to follow where these old trails used to go, as often they would go near some neat things. Anyway, my bushwhack using map and compass was uneventful until I headed out; not the way I came but to join up with a marked trail. I took a bearing from my map and followed my compass heading. When I intersected the trail, my position was off considerably. For a few years I could not figure out what went wrong. I then came across an old usgs publication which had a map of this area identifying areas with significant magnetic anomalies due to outcroppings of magnetite ore. These anomalies were upwards of 24degrees depending upon distance. The cause of my navigation error was finally revealed. I still rely on my compass and map, but your comment reminded me of this story.

are phones/electronics banned at 4H, FFA, little league, travel soccer, etc... If a patrol (not plc) decides their activity will be done without aid (or distraction) of some man made object, then ok. I think it is great when a patrol "bans tents" so they can build and sleep in a primitive structure, or "bans stoves" so they can cook over an open fire, etc... If a scout does not want to attend an activity planned by his patrol,ok sit this one out. Miss out on all the fun. If a scout on a campout spends all his time sitting on a log reading and not interacting with his patrol, I would think a SM conference would be in order to help determine why the boy isn't participating. Substitute book for electronic device. IMO, the issue is not the device.

Simply because someone doesn't understand the usefulness of something, or doesn't use it themselves does not mean it isn't useful to others. Very little is actually necessary, so to use required as the threshold for usefulness or whether it should exist is hardly compelling.

Instagram also uses hashtags. These tags allow someone to follow a tag and not just a person.

The intent used to be in the handbook in the sections associated with the requirements.

I think sometimes too many view the requirements in a vacuum for advancement purposes only and miss out on the intent. Scouts should be observant and knowledgeable of their natural surroundings. Go outside, walk around, have fun. Find stuff, find out what it is. Make a game of it. Have fun. The requirements will happen with only a wee bit of focus.