Eagle94-A1

With national increasing prices, and councils adding their own fees, Scouting is slowing becoming cost prohibitive for most families. And do not tell me to sell Popcorn. We have only 1 unit in my area selling it, and they are struggling. Only reason they are doing it is to have council waive their per Scout unit charge. And I have a feeling council will backslide on that.

CST 15 posted the following In August 2025, there were 51,888 Scouts in CST-15, compared to 53,544 in August 2024, reflecting a decrease of 3.09 percent. National youth membership stood at 814,950 at the end of August 2025, down 6.35 percent from 870,177 in August 2024. Results per CST-15 councils are shown in this table. Over the past 12 months, the number of units in CST-15 decreased from 2,593 to 2519, a loss of -2.85%. Nationally, units decreased from 39, 511 to 38,582, a loss of -2.35%.

$170 membership fee?!?!?!?!?! Only 1 of my Scouts could afford that.

i do not remember seeing this when I took Aquatics Supervision Swimming. It was an intense course.

While the Scouters in my district were skeptical of me being their DE, I was #3 in a 3 or 4 year period, only had one long time Scouter try to intimidate me. I didn't know who he was, but he made some comments about me "sleeping in a mudpuddle" at an OA Ordeal. Since he was spotless, I replied with my home lodge's old mantra, " a clean Arrowman is a lazy Arrowman," and walked off to join my chapter.

Biggest drawback is time prep. We did our own summer camp during COVID, and although I was an essential worker and had to go in to work, I had a lot more time to create a program. I do not think I could do the same thing now. Plus most of the adults are now focused on advancement and MBs, and not adventure. And this attitude has gone down to the Scouts. I have 2 scouts whose last summer camp will be 2026. One of them's attitude is the same as their parent's: they have all the MBS they need for Eagle and do not need to go to summer camp. The previous SM and I had to talk about HA activities at various camps. neither the Scout nor their parent realized they could do those activities. Funny thing is the ones who went to COVID CAMP said it was the best summer camp ever, but would not want to do it again. When asked why, they said no MBs. Even though every activity was part of a MB, and several MBs were started. Absolutely correct. Especially when camps are up for sale. Understatement. Same thing has happened in my council. Now some districts have less than 30% of the district positions staffed. It is not stupidity or ego, rather it is their superiors pressuring them to get agreeable, or as one SE called them "Pro-Council" committee members instead of the best possible choices. At least when I went thru the DE training, they taught us the right way, and would not talk about how folks are being told to do it. So the problem is known.

20 year olds cannot serve in the district role per National. And as a 21-24 year old district committee member, I can tell you from first hand experience some Scouters viewed me as "just a kid, " 'you do not know anything because..." no knots, no beds, no SM patch, ad nauseam. No, we are not complaining about lack of support from district committee members, we are complaining about the treatment by pros, which causes folks to not want to be involved at the district level at all. In my district's situation, the large majority of positions are vacant because no one wants to deal with the issues mentioned above. On thing I forgot earlier Pros need to be TRUSTWORTHY, and. not lie abut why things are being done, or not being done. Best example I can give is the council being told one reason things are being done, and the unit and district volunteers a different reason why things are being done. Do you want how it is supposed to be done, how the Pros want it done, or how it is done in reality, at least in my experience with multiple councils? The nominating committee is suppose to look at who is the best person for the job recruit them, and have the district committee vote EN BANC (emphasis) as a slate of officers. There are no choices for each position, and committee member selection can be rigged. The Pros want a nominating committee who will put people in positions so that they will do exactly what the Pros want them to do with no questioning. When I was a DE, my SE told me point blank to only select folks who can follow directions, and not necessarily the best person for each job. In reality it is whomever is willing to do the work gets the job, regardless if they are capable or not.

How many CORs are actually active on the district and council level? In my long experience, I only know of two. One was a former SM. The other was already active on the district level, and elected District Chairman when he was "appointed to be the COR. The members-at-large are usually the ones doing the actual work. 1. Pros should not ignore the unit Scouters when they need help. Listen to them as they are the heart and soul of the program. Without volunteers, you cannot have the program to recruit members. They know what works and what doesn't. While some have been Scouters a short time, others have years, even decades, of experience. 2. Pros need listen to your district level Scouters as they tend to have a lot more knowledge, skills, and experience than the pros do, especially in the service area. While Pros can stay 3-5 years in an assignment, in my neck of the wood the average 9 months. One DE left in under 30 days. 3. Do not second guess, over rule, etc the volunteers when they are assigned something to do. Best example is volunteer who was "voluntold" he was running a district camporee with 7 weeks notice because the camporee chief quit (see 4 below). Pro didn't interfere that year and it was a successful camporee. Volunteer agreed to do the following year. The Pros interfered so much it caused major headaches for the volunteer, and the event to go overbudget. Supplies were not ordered, so those supplies had to purchased locally at a higher cost. Camp got triple booked over the objections of the two folks running ITOLS and the camporee. This caused the campwide compass course to be redone hours before opening, and additional supplies not budgeted to deal with the anticipated parking issues and to designate the Cub area from the Scout areas. And I can go on and on about the interference. That volunteer promised to never run another district event ever again. 4. Pros need to remember "a Scout is Courteous." They should not yell, berate, and curse out volunteers. Especially ones who are also business leaders in the community. Not only will folks willing to volunteer dry up, but also FOS dollars will as well. Some long time businesses donors heard about these things, and stopped giving. More later

As a former pro, I can tell you even with professionals leading every troop, the quality will vary. Yes it is a red flag, one that says the council is not supporting the units, at least in my experience with 2 different councils. Districts and councils are there to support the unit, not the other way around. If a unit is in need of help from the district/council, and is constantly being ignored, the unit will start isolating themselves. If unit leaders work to put on events, and do not get the support they need to run the event, get overruled on things, or the event is cancelled last minute despite everything being in place and ready to go, but the "budget surplus" is not being met, then units will start isolating themselves. If a unit attends their council summer camp, and it is an absolute Charley Foxtrot; with the suggestions and recommendations to improve the camp and its program are ignored, then you will have units doing their own thing. The irony in my experience is that the leaders of these units were usually some of the most active, pro council volunteers. In one council I was in, the units in question had former district committee members, Silver Beavers and OA Vigils in them. They were accused of being "Council Kool Aid Drinkers ( I know, Jim Jones used Flavor Aid), because they were at one time so supportive of council. Ditto on the second council I have seen this occur.

I would be EXTREMELY leery about this. Sometimes that is all it takes. But most of the time it takes that PLUS mentoring. And I have seen cases where folks took the training, thought they knew better, and ignored any mentoring to get them up to speed. Kayn Hourbacker got it at 11. He joined at 10 years old, and did it in exactly 19 months. Then there is this girl at 12. I question how much they really know. I met one Eagle who got it at 13 that I can say knew their stuff. He was also pushed by his Eagle And Explorer Ranger Award dad ( OK I screwed up, I called the dad a Gold award recipient all these years because Ranger ended in 1949. But I recently found out that if you started it before 1949, you got to finish it until 1951.) Here is the deal though, he quit immediately after getting it. No HA trips, jamborees, OA, nothing.

Thanks for the updated stats. You are correct.. Don't ask about recruiting outside of school round ups and talks. We do them, and most boys interested in what we do are already in Scouts. And those troop are catching on to focusing on adventure, not advancement. I have recruited more girls for the girls troop. One Girl Scout said she wished her GSUSA troop would do some of the stuff we do. When I mentioned the girls troop she said, " My mom would kill me. She works for the Girl Scouts."

Depends upon circumstances. My unit follows the program, retains Scouts, even long after they earn Eagle in some cases. We have an active program that the Scouts pick. Adults do not force them to do an activity they do not want to do. But we have no feeder pack, and have not in at least 15 years. Troop always had transfers into it. Out of the 7 on my charter, 5 transferred from other troops, and 1 had his older brothers transfer into it. And the troop has survived by having an active, Scout-led program since before I transferred 7 years ago. I cannot find the stat now, but last time I checked 90+% of Scouts move up from Cub Scouts. And usually troops die within 6 years of packs folding. The other troop without a pack has not had one in 5 years, and they may be folding. The 2 troops with packs have wised up, and started imitating us. Not only do they jealously guard their Cub Scout packs, they are now retaining their Scouts. One of those troops, is the one I transferred from. I almost had 1/2 the troop transfer with me, until the COR stepped in. And in my neck of the woods, lack of Cub Scout recruiting is the #1 reason units are folding.

You do know that the research for "OPERATION FIRST CLASS," "First Class, First Year," or whatever it is called now is deeply flawed? The research was done in the 1980s, and the idea came out in August 1989. That's when they did away with Skill Awards, time requirements for Tenderfoor, Second Class, and First Class, and went from "Master the Skills," to "The Badge represents what a Scout CAN DO (SIC), not what he has done." mentality which IMHO leads to "One and Done." Research showed that Scouts who got First Class in 18 months stay around longer, which is true. BUT what was not included in the stats was 2 things: 1.How active a unit is and 2. LDS units. The more active a troop is, doing the activities the Scouts want to do, will lead to retention. Yes advancement is slower, but those Scouts stick around longer. Best example is my soon to be 21 y.o. ASM. He spent 4 years working on First Class as the swimming requirement was the issue. But the troop dis activities he liked, and he stuck around. He eventually passed the swim test, and earned Eagle. He has stuck around as much as possible while in college. And all of my Eagles have stuck around until 18, or until they started college. Why? Because we are active and do the activities they want to do. But the surveyors dis not show how active a troop was in their results. The LDS units would segregate their 11 year old Scouts. I have seen lesson plans where the 11 year old patrol would repeat the same program every year. They were treated as if they were still Cub Scouts, with an ASM serving more as a DL, and TGs acting more like den chiefs. Their program guaranteed them First Class in one year. One reason why LDS units got upset when the Camping requirement for First Class went from 4 camp outs to 6 campouts in 2016: their 11 year olds were not allowed to camp more than 4 times /year. And their protest changed it back to 4 (aside this ticked off my middle son as he had to wait 2 months to get the 6 campouts in, and right as he goes for his First Class BOR, National changed it back to 4. He was ticked off) And since the LDS used Scouting as their youth program, ALL (emphasis) males were registered in their troops, whether they were active or not. That skewed the data. So do not take the First Class, First Year to seriously. If you push it, you will have Scouts get bored, note care, leave, or stick around long enough to get Eagle and then quit. I have seen this happen with a lot over the years.

That is pretty much what happened in the UK when their program went coed. Sure you could have all male, all female, and coed troops. But over time the all the single gender units died out any only all female exist today. Or so I am told.

He said next year, but if the word has not happened yet, it may be 2027 before going into effect since many crews are already set.

My source said no. All 4 adults must have WFA when it goes into effect.

To quote the grandfather in The Princess Bride, "Wait, just wait." I was informed that the number of adults will soon be 4. Apparently the number of adults not qualifying at check in, or needing evac on the trek is over 1/3. One of my Scouters plans on staffing next year, and that is what he was told.

Had a good conversation with our COR last nite. Helps he is also a former SM and knows all the challenges I face in that role. We are on the verge of folding. He know it, our adults know it, and the Scouts may know it. We need one more Scout in order to recharter, and we are going full throttle on recruiting. Our DE says they can help us get into the schools. I hope that is true and he follows through, but the council's record on that is poor. But as Gandalf the White said, " There is always hope, a fool's hope." We will be doing our annual fundraiser as if we will be rechartering. Goal is to raise enough money to pay national and council fees, and summer camp. We will continue Scouting on. Back up plan is if the troop does not recharter, pay for everyone's, both adults and youth, registration and council fees, pay for summer camp, and save the rest to restart the troop at a later date. I am sticking around as SM until December 2026. I have idea on someone to replace me, but want to get them up to speed.

Since September/October 2018, ALL (major emphasis) Scouting activities, including patrol day activities, requires 2 registered adults over 21. They tried to make it go into effect in March, but a lot of units with summer camp and HA plans with only 1 adult over 21 and 1 adult over 18 pushed back on it. One of the few times National listened to their volunteers. But I bet all those units wanting refunds was why.

Hopefully the donors, or their trustees/descendants, will not sign over deeds outright. We had that happen, and the camp got sold. And not a thing we could do about it to stop the sale.

As I have mentioned, I have been around NSPs since they were an experiment. Every time the NSP has been tried with a troop I was involved in, it either exhausted the TG, or it turned into Webelos 3 with adults interfering. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. (major emphasis). And every single troop has gone to Traditional Patrols. Including the troop that had one NSP that could keep up with the older Scouts because the initial group began the transition in 4th grade. That was the closest to a successful NSP. The problem came when the other pack crossed over their Scouts, and they were not ready at all. They did not focus on transition until 1 month before AOL and Cross Over ceremonies.

When has BSA in recent history ever not allowed a pilot program go all out? This decision has been made by the pros, and I bet Oct. is the next time the volunteers meet to rubber stamp the decision.

In 1989 when aged based patrols became the recommendation instead of Traditional, mixed aged patrols, that was the beginning of fall of the Patrol Method. In 2012, when they no longer allowed patrols to camp on their own without adult supervision, that furthered the fall. In 2018 when they no longer allowed patrols to have any day activities, i.e. patrol meetings, hikes, camp shopping etc, unless 2 registered adults over the age of 21, that nailed the coffin shut IMHO.

I was involved at the district and council levels for a very long time in several capacities, sometime 2 at the same time. I also servedwith a pack and district committee at the same time. I had to step back from district and council roles when oldest joined a troop, and I was with the pack and the troop. Even then I got Shanghaied onto the district committee when at a RT I was told I was running camporee with 2 months notice. So I did 14 months in that role and ran 2 camporees. But the pros caused a lot of problems. You can read about them in other threads. While "the council is the volunteers," the professionals, through their actions, can tick off the volunteers. Ticking off volunteers will lead to not having any volunteers to help on the district or council level.

I have stepped back from all council and district positions to focus on the troop. What ticks me off is that I had done so much to help the council in the past when I was able, but now when I need help because I an not able, I am on my own. On another note, this past weekend will probably be the last weekend when all my registered Scouts, "adult participants," and 20 y.o. ASM got together and had a blast. One final campout before school and college starts up.