Eagle94-A1

I hate to say it, but I worked with professionals who were not Trustworthy. Thank goodness I have copies of my records I turned into the council office.

I would not split. I remember the pack I was in, when it was a 3 year program and Tiger Cubs was optional, was 3 Wolf dens, 3 Bear dens, and 3 Webelos dens. That is approximately 75-90 Cubs, not including the 8-10 Tiger Cubs who showed up 1/2 the time.

Regarding the deposit, gotcha. Yes I have heard of someone who agreed to work camp, went to NCS, then backed out after NCS, putting camp in a pickle. Reimbursement is good. Regarding NCS patches, I stil don't think so. If the training is like camp medical officers, online, then no patch.

IF they went to NCS, then they are entitled to wear it. If not, then no. What I'm interested in is why they are charging you to attend NCS for the resident camp? Normally that is something budgeted by council and paid for by them.

Nothing official, but my opinion based upon talking to long-time Scouters, Professionals, and my own personal experience as a former pro 20 years ago. The divorcing of Scouting principles from the executives started around the early 1970s when membership started dropping. When membership drops, so do the donations. And both are key factors in an professional's performance. DEs at that time did all kind of things to keep their numbers up. Some were caught and dismissed. But alot survived and moved higher and higher within the organization. As they did so, they covered up their tracks pretty well, and "encouraged" their subordinates to do the same in order to keep their jobs. Remember a lot of DEs are fresh out of college, are heavy in debt, and may be facing other challenges in their lives. They may feel they cannot afford to lose their job. Some bust butt to try and fix the problem. Only to face increased pressure since doing things right takes a lot longer than the "shortcuts," stressed out because they are working 2 and 3 times harder than their peers, get health issues, burn out, or in my case given an ultimatum by my wife: her or the job. And some fo the higher level pros enjoy "breaking" folks trying to fix the problem. My DFS gleefully announced my resignation after it was tendered. And he commented on friends' resignations after they left. I was lucky. My wife saw what the job was doing to me, didn't like it one bit, and was willing to drop her dreams of grad school to support me while I searched for a new job. Thankfully, she was only delayed in grad school a semester. But I have had friends suffer nervous breakdowns over the job. I and other started having physical health issues over the job. And I have had too many friends get divorced over the job. And all of that could have been solved if they didn't do the right thing and try to fix the problem. Not all pros are like the above. But too many are IMHO. part of that is they are not in the field dealing with those of us actually workign with youth.

For those who have not seen the new Youth Protection slide in the presentations, it's below. I agree. You need a female with you with a group of girls. There have been cases where the male has been prosecuted and exonerated, but the males have lost. Duke Lacrosse Team is but one example. BUT I also know that with Scouting, National will take the word of a Scout, even if known as a liar to keep out of trouble, over a respected female Scouter. And they won't reinstate them either after an investigation proves the accusation false, and the "Scout" is a peeping Tom.

Nope. Some of the comments not online were, "It's not a big deal." and 'I don't think parents would go for 2 guys being leaders for their daughter." Online it's been " let's talk about society in general. According to this -- Child sex abusers are "overwhelmingly male, ranging from adolescents to the elderly." http://victimsofcrime.org/media/reporting-on-child-sexual-abuse/statistics-on-perpetrators-of-csa So, if the goal is risk mitigation, I can understand it. " and " a female Den Leader working with boys, I have never really been alone with boys. There are always parents around, " And I forgot to add Stosh recognized the irony too. and "Parents of girls will be protective of them, and a cautious parent will not let a male leader be alone with a group of 6 year old girls, whether its in the policies or not. They'll show up. "

Yep, I commented on the double standard with 2 females can lead an all male den, but a female MUST be present for an all girl den a few weeks ago when the early adapter program info came out to execs. Sad thing is that NO ONE except @Back Pack and I seem to have a problem with it.

WHY? Seriously why shortchange the Cubs? 3 den meetings a month is not that hard. Been there, done that.

Don't you mean December/January 2018, the earliest the 4th grade female Webelos who are "early adopters" can cross over?

It was in one of the reports regarding the survey and was in the fine print. I need to be more specific though as not all LDS scouters were excluded. WESTERN REGION'S results excluded LDS folks, and that region has the bulk of the LDS membership.

In regards to coed troops with segregated PATROLS ( emphasis, sorry about the confusion earlier) that is from Mike Walton. I can't find the quote, but it is on Facebook. And considering how well connected he is, he tends to know more than the average Scouter. He is one of the top volunteers who attend the annual meetings. As for not trusting national, how can we when they go back on what they say. They take polls and either don't show any or all of the data, or ignore the results. When they polled about changing the youth membership policy, they excluded results from LDS Scouters. They didn't even poll on changing adult membership policy, they just did it. Instapalms had something like 75+ % Strongly against and 10+% against, totaling 94% , doing away with 3 month tenure requirements. Then there is changing the Cub Scout requirements on the spur of the moment, While I was not involved in June 2015 Cub Scout Program, I know folks who were. They spent a long time talking to folks in the field about improving the program. I though the new program was a major improvement. Then without any warning, or giving packs the opportunity to work out the kinks of the first year, they up and change the program. And then they did it again with the camping requirements for Second and First Class. How can folks trust national?

Project had meaning and wasn't because it was easy effort. Heard some Christmas horror stories about poor kids, in the hospital, for Christmas. That got the idea going. Good bit of work advertising, collecting, and especially cleaning ( was collecting new and "gently used" toys and had to be cleaned to hospital standards, and even then, I think they took them somewhere to be sterilized) the toys. Then distributing them. That was heartwrenching.

Regarding the surveys and policy changes, I think it is safe to say national doesn't care what we in the field think. The homosexual membership policies had slim majorities against the change, and they did it anyway. And let's not forget the Instapalm survey in 2015. 94% agreed or strongly agreed with keeping the 3 months tenure for palms, and national created instapalms anyway. And if the surveys, which were IMHO deliberately limited to avoid a good sample AND had such biased questions that it was ridiculous, truly reflected the majority of members, Scouters, and family members supports girls joining the program, then why don't they publish the results? Again the decision was made by national, and it was made prior to July 2017 as the newest membership applications remove the words boys when describing Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts.

Sadly it looks as if we will be going to the same old places. We do 2-3 campouts at the nearby Scout camp. Another camp out at an OOC Scout camp. Then we go to nearby state parks or private camp grounds. One we have not been to in about 3 years reopened, but it is also 30 feet outside of city limits. The other adults do not want to do anything over an hour away in the winter months so that there will be some light for the Scouts to set up camp. They don't think the Scouts are ready for nite time set ups.

Why I wish BSA did not go coed. One FB there is discussion on this topic, and now the word is single gender dens within coed troops. That's from a well known volunteer, but he's been right on the money in the past.

Thought I posted this previously so here it goes again. To my knowledge, all three of those ceremonies linked are adapted from OA ceremonies. The Seven Virtues was the OA ceremony I went through over 30 years ago. I've done both the The Four Winds and The Seven Virtues as a Arrowman, including the Eagle version of the Four Winds. And the Cub Scout Trail is a ceremony I've worked with youth on. All of them have been around for years. And I've only seen OA ceremony teams do them. I've never seen these three ceremonies used by a pack alone.

My project came to me when I was a Star and talking to my cousin at Christmas. She worked in a pediatric ICU unit, and told me some stories. Long story short, my project was collecting toys for the kids at her hospital's pediatric ward.

I am already having challenges with national's new fee. Charge my son for his Eagle application, and you can kiss not only FOS, but all participation in district/council level activities, except for free ones, goodbye.

We had one guy join in 5th grade, while he didn't cross over with his den, he was visiting the troop as a Webelos every week until he turned 11, which was about 2 or 3 months later. We had one guy this year finish everything but the tenure requirements in mid September. He spent the remaining time with the troop visiting.

I know first hand how lodges and local nationa help each other out. I was a part of that in one lodge directly, and in a second one indirectly. And this goes back a long wasy in OA history. Once upon a time it was illegal to practice elements of NA curlture, one way around this was the OA and using it a "teaching opportunity."

The first time I saw an OA ceremony team was at my AOL and Cross Over ceremonies. WOW THAT WAS AWESOME! It made me want to join the OA and do cool things like that. It is also a good way to promote the OA. One chapter I was in had a hard time and was in serious decline. We used AIA to revitalize it and make some serious impreovements. AIA team had a lot to do with it.

That is correct. BUT they only need to meet the Bobcat and AOL requirements. BUT if they join as 4th graders in a Spring Round up, even if the pack does not meet over the summer, that is 3 months tenure for them.

Every unit is different, just as every Scout is different. In my neck of the woods, Dec-Jan has turned into Cross Over month because of recharter. Packs don't want to deal with rechartering folks only for a month or less. And we have a semi active summer: a couple activities and day camp. Both my older sons' dens were chomping at the bit to cross over in December. Plus it gives more time for the new Scouts to get acclimated to Boy Scouts before summer camp. One thing to remember, even when a unit does not meet, it count towards being active with the unit for advancement purposes. So even if the unit does not meet during the summer, it counts.

While a lot may need more time, not all. While the "Early Adopters" cannot have 5th graders currently, come June 1st, they will be "AOL Cub Scouts". And the requirement is Be active in your Webelos den for at least six months since completing the fourth grade or for at least six months since becoming 10 years old. Theoretically, if a girl could earn AOL and cross over as early as June 16th if she was in 4th grade and turned ten prior to January 16th. As for holding back dens, how do you think it would play out if only boys were able to cross over, butnot the girls?