Eagle94-A1

That is why any issues, concerns, or problems a SM has with the Elections Team and/or Advisor need to be dealt with privately and calmly. I know I have had a few of those over the years. But when a SM starts yelling and berating the youth election team members, that is when an advisor needs to step in. And if a SM continues to make a public spectacle by yelling and berating the youth and the advisor who is trying to calmly and privately discuss the issue, then it is time for the OA election team to calmly leave like I did.

I guess this would be anecdotal, but here it goes. One of my Scouts had "delayed entry" into the air force. He could not get his EBOR in before basic training, and he turned 18 during training. Long story short, he comes back from basic, gets a BOR scheduled, and the night of the BOR, the district rep discovers that he missed the no questions asked deadline by 2 days, and he needed to appeal to national. They had a nice "chat" with him, wished him well on his appeal, and stated they will be more than willing to do an EBOR for him. He got Eagle, but by the time everything was approved and done, he left for active duty. Never did have his ECOH.

I had an SM try to intimidate my Arrowmen into taking off a name of a Scout he didn't think was worthy AFTER he approved it. It got very heated when I intervened. This happened to be the same SM w whom I found out rigged the election previously by telling the Scouts who to vote for so all three eligible could get in (back when there was limits on who could be on the ballot),

This is what causes problems: folks ignoring the procedures and doing their own thing. OA Election Team Should NEVER have added a Scout's name to the elected sheet simply because the SM recommends them. That is not how it is done. From personal experience, I know youth on an election team can get intimidated at times by adults. So my question is, where was the adult adviser to intervene on behalf of the election team?

IMHO, I an guessing someone at the troop/council royally screwed up, and the only way to resolve the situation was to get the national team to intervene.

Also I want to apologize to @Scoutmaster Teddy for being over defensive regarding college students. I remember the disrespect I got from some Scouters, some with less experience in the movement than I had at the time, all due to my age. Add to that what has been going on with my troop, i.e. "The Scouts aren't ready to lead," and it I get overly sensitive. .

Update from national https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/blog/bsa-clears-misconceptions-path-eagle-scout-rank-utah-scout-down-syndrome/

With all due respect, if you have a problem with 18 year old college students who are qualified to teach Eagle required MBs, then you may have a problem with operations in your unit. I was one of those "Over 18 and in college" MBCs who taught several Eagle required MBs, specifically Camping, First Aid, Swimming, and Lifesaving, in addition to several other MBs. As an 18 year old certified YMCA lifeguard instructor who had completed two 50 milers afloat , I felt more than qualified teaching the aquatic MBs. I admit not every camp has good staff, but that is more on the CD and PD than age generalization.

Somewhere I read he was a registered Cub Scout still, which would mean the Boy Scout advancement is null and void. And there is a way for SCOUTNET to allow someone over 11 to remain in Cub Scouts. Do not know the specifics except I had two packs with 17 and 19 year old Cub Scouts. Developmentally they were 2nd or 3rd graders.

I think someone at the local council, whether the pack and/or troop, or the council screwed up. It appears that the Scout has been registered as a Cub Scout all this time, and as a result ineligible for Boy Scout awards. I wonder why the council has not caught the problem earlier. Realistically he can stay a Boy Scout past his 18th birthday with the required paperwork. As stated previously, I've seen a 44 year old BOY (emphasis) Scout who not only had Down's Syndrome, but also legally blind earn his Eagle. Gut feeling: National and Local Council will review the situation to find out what went wrong. Depending upon what happened, I bet the boy will be retroactively made a Boy Scout, retroactively earned the awards he has earned, and will get the project approved, and eventually earn Eagle. From what I know of national, they A) do not allow adults' mistakes to affect youth (whether for good or bad is another question), and B) When the word "lawsuit" happens, they cave.

@Hawkwin, You do have a female ADL working with you? According to the info put out by national, a girls' den needs one registered, YPT female over 21 in addition to a second person.

This has been a topic of conversation on Facebook. There is a lot of confusion due to the terminology used by the dad in some previousreports. A lot of information is being left out of this and the previous articles IMHO. BSA has a program where Special Needs Scouts can advance. There are procedures in place that need to be followed. I knew a 44 year blind special needs SCOUT ( emphasis) who earned Eagle. Mentally he was about 13 or 14.

Besides Eagle1993, are there any other Early Adopters out there? The Pack and Troop Scouters will be meeting with our CO regarding Family Scouting, and they want to know "the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly." And if challenges have arisen, what have been the solutions. @Eagle1993, thanks for all the posts and please keep them coming. It is helping a lot.

Agree about online. Missing out on the paraverbal and nonverbal, that gives context to what we are saying. Best example I can give is how the tone, speed, and volume, as well as our body language of a sales clerk can tel you if they really want to help, or going through the motions. And yes that is everyone's concern I've talked to now save one. Had a chance to talk to our SM who was gung ho about girls joining because he has a daughter who is pumped up. And he now has some reservations about how the change.

@Eagle1993 I understand completely that you "do not want any child who has joined scouting to feel less than a full member." And I agree with that sentiment. But what I and many others who are against girls in the program, as well those who are for girls, are concerned about is changes to the program to accommodate girls to the detriment of the boys. If you look at the statistics, boys are currently being short-changed in our society. They are behind in school, they are being diagnosed and medicated for ADHD more than girls, have lower high school and college graduation rates, and more likely to get involved in crime. And it appears that there are no longer any national organizations dedicated just to boys anymore. But plenty for girls. I am also concerned about double standards being raised, as they already have occured. There was a thread about how it's OK for two female Scouters to work with all male Cub Scout dens by themselves, but two men cannot work with an all female Cub Scout den. Sorry, if you need a woman working with the girls, then you should need a man to work with the boys.

I'm linking these two quotes because they go together, just bear with me and read all of my comment before going ballistic. We already know that many parents today view convenience as being more important than development. Let's face it we see it with parents having their kids"earn" Cub Scout awards due to their parents signatures, parents pushing kids to advance, etc. BSA has hopped aboard that as their stated reason for "Family Scouting:" making it more convenient for families to have a one stop Scouting experience. As a result I see fewer and fewer all male Cub Scout packs in the future. And the bulk of our Boy Scouts come from Cub Scouts. If fewer and fewer all male packs exist, it stands to reason that fewer and fewer all male troops will exist, despite what national has said. We've already heard from volunteers in the field that they will ignore national's directives, even Early Adapter packs are having to "joint" all girl and all male dens meeting. And national just hedged on the All male and All Female troops with the "Linked Troops" that share leadership, meeting locations, activities, etc. If we use the UK as a model, all male units will slowly go away, leaving no option. When I was in the UK shortly after they went coed, there were still some all make units. But talking to some of the traditional Scouters, they said more folks are going to the coed units than theirs because of their siblings. They predicted at some point there would be no more all male units. While the Scout Association hastened all male units demise by mandating coed, I wonder what the numbers were from 1995 when I was there, until the coed mandate. So the only way I see all male troops continuing is by themselves without a feeder pack. In order to grow, they will need an active program, active recruiting strategy, and outstanding Scouters who know their stuff, usually with years of experience behind them. While extremely more difficult to do, troops without feeder packs can grow. My troop growing up didn't have a feeder pack for years. We had our ups and downs in membership until we got a feeder pack. But even with an active program and recruiting efforts, you may not be successful. One of the absolute best troops ever had no feeder pack, just an outstanding SM and dedicated adults helping. That troop lasted about 18 years before finally folding. When folks came to visit them, they also saw the next door troop, which was larger and had a reputation fro producing Eagles. Why would someone join the one patrol troop if they could join a multipatrol troop with a rep for producing Eagles? And let's be honest, how many troops have excellent Scouters? As someone stated at my district banquet last nite, dedicated Scouters tend to view the Scouts as 'their second sons." A lot of time, energy, and treasure is spent taking care of "my Scouts." So how do you think many of those old time Scouters feel when they believe that the National office is not listening to them? Let's face it, when National calculated the results of whether to accept homosexuals into the program, the footnotes states that Western Region's LDS membership was not included in the results. And even without those voices being included, you still had a slight majority against the membership policy change. Wouldn't you feel ignored if you were part of the majority, and national went against your wishes anyway? Regarding the current membership change, there is enough evidence to support those who believe that the decision to allow girls was made before the town hall meetings. Professionals in late 2016/early 2017 being told by the CSE of big membership changes coming is one example that people are showing to prove the decision was already made to go coed before the town hall meetings and poll. BSA publications becoming gender-neutral in July 2017 is another example of reasons people believe the decision was made before the town hall. The time frame of when national wanted the town halls to be done: a 3 week period that included time when many key volunteers are at jamboree is another example why many long time volunteers believe the decision to go coed was made prior to the town halls.. My Scout exec had a week to set up 2 town halls. Finally national is not reporting the data FROM THE MEMBERSHIP SURVEYS (emphasis, all data national is using to support going coed is from NONMEMBER surveys).For those against allowing girls in the program, this is one of the biggest reasons why they believe national does not listen: they won't report the members' survey data. Folks against allowing girls already have a lot of hard feelings. And some of the negative, un-Scoutlike attitudes they are encountering are not helping matters. In fact it is furthering their decisions to leave. And as Qwasze stated "...we need them...." We are going to get a lot more volunteers who have little to no Scouting experience and will not only need experienced trainers, but also mentors to advise and coach them. Let's face it, training doesn't provide everything one needs to know to be a Scouter. They need someone to mentor them and go to for advice. Trust me, losing those experienced, long time Scouters is devastating, especially if you have no one to fill their places. Having them gone does indeed leave a major gap that affects our Scouts. We lost many dedicated folks with the previous membership policy change. We lost commissioners, trainers, program folks, etc. that provided resources for the units in my area. That doesn't include the unit level Scouters we lost resulting in units closing down.

Wikipedia is talking about the old kits. A few years back they went to the trimarans

One reason why my sons' pack, with a few exceptions, i.e. religious requirements, has a Activity Badge Counselor do the signing off. One of my Scouts signed off on the Castaway requirements for middle son, and the ASPL signed off for youngest since SPL was oldest brother.

IMHO that is indeed the problem. Webelos IS the transition period between Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts. Webelos IS when they go from parents signing off to Activity Badge instructors signing off. Webelos IS when they start going from "Do Your Best" to "Master The Skills." Webelos IS when they need to start doing more during their camp outs. Sadly I am seeing more and more packs and WDLs treat Webelos as a continuation of Cub Scouts rather than a a transition to Boy Scouts. I'll give you three examples of how transitioning during Webelos does work. My Webelos den growing up did more than the other 2 Webelos Dens. My den went camping on its own, had a Den Chief, and transitioned us towards Boy Scouts. My den Crossed Over into Boy Scouts and stuck around until an unfortunate incident that I transferred to another troop before it happened. My oldest son's den started the transition as soon as they became Webelos. They took on more responsibilities, upped the game, etc. They were prepared for Boy Scouts, and pumped up. 4 years later later, 1/2 that den is still active. And I bet if the other half would have transferred to another troop, they would be in it. In all honesty the closest I have ever seen a NSP work out well, was when those 4 were in the same patrol as new guys. If it wasn't for the new Scouts from 2 other packs, they would have rocked. Out of 5 Scouts from 2 different packs, 3 quit within a year, and the 4th quit within 2 years. The 5th one had a hard time adapting, and cried a lot on camp outs in the early stages. Dad would not let him quit. But talking to both packs CMs, the packs treated Webelos like standard Cub Scouts, and the results showed. They were not ready. Middle son's den was the same way: doing things on their own, taking responsibility, etc. 3 Webelos from his den joined the troop to work on Castaway for their last camp out as Webelos. THEY ROCKED! One Webelos had his shelter built, firewood collected, and was cooking his lunch before I finished my shelter! We got 4 Webelos from that pack, and all 4 remain 14 months later. Compared to the other pack's den which used the "do your best" standard and had parents doing the bulk of the work for them. Out of the 9 that crossed over, 5 quit in less than 6 months. 1 Scout has only been on two camp outs: summer camp and a nearby weekend trip. And 2 Scouts won't camp unless mom or dad is present. We had 3 Webelos Cross Over in December from the pack where the parents do it all. Of the three, 1 remains 2 months. His dad was a Scout back in the day, and began transitioning him 2 years ago, despite what the other parents were doing and encouraging him to do.

back when I worked in supply, we had a few, not many but a few, GSUSA leaders spick up BSA literature to incorporate into their GSUSA program.

Regarding the World Crest, some of you may not remember that prior to August 1, 1989, you had to EARN (emphasis) the World Crest in order to wear it.I earned mine in 1987. I remember that exact date that allowed everyone to wear it because I was on a bus in Canada in the middle of an international trip that would have qualified everyone for the award when the adults apologized to use about the new rule. Trip was advertised as a way to earn that award. To make up for the rule change, we received the Canadian version of the badge, which is on a velvet background. So no, I will not be removing something I earned because I disagree with allowing girls in Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts. Now, will I remain active after February 1, 2019? I do not know. I am already frustrated with national over all of this. I believe they are ignoring what the majority of members and volunteers want since they are not publishing those statistics, but are publishing the nonmember ones. Plus they do have a history of ignoring what the members and volunteers want. Further I believe that either Surbaugh et al are either inept in their implementation plan, or they deliberately lied about the implementation plan.It is not realistic, and many will ignore it just as some are ignoring the current BSA policies. Either way, National does not instill a lot of confidence in me about the future of the Boy Scouts of America. Then there are all the local issues going on. The entire "Family Scouting" concept has no consistent meaning, and my troop is taking a very broad approach to "Family Scouting." I do not agree with it because it is interfering with what the program is suppose to be:allowing Scouts to grow up and be independent. Already getting complaints fro my sons and others about the parents interfering. But most importantly, my decision will be based upon what my sons want to do. I do see Oldest earning Eagle and getting out. Scouting is no longer fun for him, but he has a goal and wants to complete it. I have no clue what Middle Son will do. He is getting bored with all the family camping the troop is doing. Only 2 activities he is looking forward to: the AT trip in June, and Summer Camp in July. None of the other trips appeal to him because they are at the same old places, or are family camp outs. As for my youngest, he is completely against girls in the program. He cites the homeschool groups merging of the Boys and Girls Clubs. When they were two separate groups, the Boys Club was extremely active and doing stereotypical boy things: Nerf wars, outside physical games, etc. The boys were meeting weekly and having fun. The Girls Club which had the same number of folks, were not as active and were doing completely different activities. Some of the adults thought it would work out better if they merged the two. When the activities started changing from what the boys wanted, they slowly lost interest in the coed club. Coed club died, and neither the Boys Club nor Girls Club was restarted. So when, not if but WHEN, my troop goes coed, I do not see him sticking around.

I think we need to be realistic. We already know not only from those serving units on the ground, but also from BSA's own info on "Linked Troops" that troops will essentially be coed since the two "troops" can have shared volunteers, meet at the same location at the same time, go camping together, etc. I do not believe Scouters involved with 'Linked Troops" will allow their "boys troop" and "girls troop" to be placed in separate campsites. Further I do not believe most councils have the financial resources to hold two, separate single gender summer camps at the same time.

June 1st is go live for all non early adopter councils, although mine is recruiting in May. So everyone should be coed for Cub Scout day camp and resident camp. In fact I found out my day camp was going coed before it's camp director did.

While ultimately the membership decision is the COs, and I agree with that because they own the unit. But if you were considering a major change, wouldn't you want to know what your major stakeholder's think about the changes? National didn't listen to the membership when they made membership policies in the past. As a result, Scouting is suffering greatly in my area. The active volunteers who got things done quit because they thought BSA was not listening to them. COs have backed away from BSA, going to Trails Life. Not including the inflated numbers from when I first got here, we have lost members and volunteers, and the bulk of that is a result of the membership changes. So yes, I would hope any CO would get the opinion of what the youth want. In my case, despite the challenges the troop has, I do not want to see it fall apart over this.

In my troop, the current SM and his future successor are both gung ho about girls. They are the ones saying the troop will be fully coed irregardless of what National says.Yet the Scouts in the troop I've talked to are not in favor of it. Haven't talked to 100% of them either. so they may be a few who are for it And I have talked to a few Scouts from other units who are opposed to girls as well. And as I mentioned one ASM is against girls, and another has mixed emotions on it. What you propose would be a good psych experiment, but even with all the paperwork involved on using human testing subjects, I do not think it would be feasible.;) Plus I think a better experiment would be for the Scouts to come up with their own opinions. One of the things I liked about Scouting was learning to think for myself. As for you nephews, if they are willing to communicate with me, I'm game.