Eagle94-A1

I know in 2013, jambo participant and staff went off site to do service work. Part of it was to give back to the community. Part of it was to find things to do for Scouts and Venturers since they had more people than events. I also remember reading complaints about making folks do service work at jambo.

Why am I not surprised. I don't remember how many I has, but it wasn't that number.

When I did the survey, i answered from the heart: No to coed Scouting; let the girls fix the problems with the GSUSA. However, I am a realist. The writing is on the wall. The CSE has been constantly talking about "Families" involved in Scouting. Current BSA imagery has contained girls in it, and Bryan's Blog did an article on an all girl Venturing Crew. There is talk of a revised YPT, and there is both external and internal pressure for change. Then there are those who are apathetic and it won't matter to them which way the decision goes. I have accepted that girls are going to be allowed in the BSA. My purpose now is this: what will be the best decision for the current boys in the program, and any girls who join. IMHO, a "separate but equal" program, either with a partnership with an existing organization or one created from scratch will not work. As has been mentioned, financial reasons, emotional reasons, and practical reasons do not make this a viable option. If the BSA goes this route, it will leave a smoldering fire that will reignite a few years down the road, and continue causing problems for the BSA. The only viable answer I see is the UK model of having COs decide if they want All Male, All Female, or coed. As for me, I am here for my sons. If they stay with a coed unit, as I have been told the troop will integrate if a "separate but equal" program is created, I will stay, If they want an all male troop, and I know there will be at least one in my neck of the woods, I go with them. If they wan tto drop and join Trails Life, I with them. Once they leave Scouting, I do not know what I will do.

Folks under 21 are considered "youth" in teh OA and must have 20 days and nights of camping, including 1 long-term camp ion the past 2 years, BE FIRST CLASS OR HIGHER, (emphasis) and BE ELECTED BY THEIR TROOP OR TEAM (emphasis again). So an 18-20 year old female could not get elected into the OA, at this time.

I took the survey. If they follow the same path they have with other surveys, they will ignore what the majority wants. And in all honesty, what it looks like they want to do will not work as I posted in the other thread.

Oh there is outside pressure for the change. But as noted also a lot of internal pressure for the change. When BSA goes fully coed, I prefer what I call "The English Model of 1995." Units have the choice of coed,all male, or all female. IMHO that is to solve this problem and get back to work to caring for our boys who are currently in the program, and anyone else who joins as a result.

The "Finnish Model" as I call a coed Cub Scout program, separate Boy Scouts and Girl Guide programs, and coed Venturing program, will not work in this country. Here are a few reasons. 1) It rings of "Separate but Equal." Let's face it, a separate Girls Scout program is already not working. why rehash the same thing within BSA? 2) Those folks demanding coed Scouting will not accept anything less than total integration. If national decided to to this, we will keep revisiting this issue over the years, further hurting our boys, as well as any girls in the programs. 3) A separate program will mean additional Scouters needed, most with no Boy Scouting experience. While we cwill get a lot of dissatisfied Girl Scouts and their volunteers, will it be enough to have a separate program? Also will they have the knowledge, skills, and experience to run a proper BSA program? Some existing units today already have challenges getting enough volunteers. 4) Units will ignore the "separate but equal" programs and integrate no matter what national decides. With the emphasis being "More Accessible to Families" why create 2 separate programs at that level, when Cubs and Venturing is already coed? Why have to double the efforts and time? When I discussed this with 3 individuals who have an interest in girls coming into the BSA, All three said they would do the separate but equal units on paper, but ignore it in practice. If BSA wants to be "Family Friendly" they will need full integration. Otherwise we will be boil;ng a frog.

As others have stated, the physical contact and yelling concern me. That is grounds for council level involvement if memory serves.

I think I need to clarify a point on my Tale of the Unqualified SPL. The Scouts knew better than the adults, knew better than the SPL's father even, that the Scout could do the job. Again Scouts know what is up. If they have real control over the troop, they will take it seriously and vote for the best candidate. If adults sweep in all the time, the kids won't care b/c the election will be a farce

BSA briefy did Rovers, circa 1935 to 1953. Great Depression didn't make it too viable, then WWII, the Cold War, and Korean War did it in.

Let me tell you the story of the "Unqualified SPL" There once was an 11 year old Tenderfoot. He was in the troop about 5 months when his patrol elected him PL. He did such a great job, that his APL nomintated him for SPL when his term as PL was over. So this 11 year old now Second Class Scout with 11 months in the troop was elected SPL. Now his dad is an Eagle, and active in Scouting still in too many roles. Dad thought it was a joke when told the son was elected SPL. Then he freaked out. Dad actually wanted son to think about what he was getting into and was he sure he wanted the job, and said it was not too late to back down. Son took it on. Over the next 6 months, the troop made a lot of progress towards being boy-led. The 11 year old Second Class Scout set a lot of good precedents. Was he perfect, no. Did he ask for help from his dad. yes. My proudest moment was when one of the older Scouts said my son was the best SPL the troop had ever had. And this was the ex-SPL whom my son looked up to. Sadly, a new influx of adults, as well as some health challenges with the SM caused major changes. The adults interfered so much that progress towards boy-led took an almost 180 degree turn, and the older Scouts have lost interest in being in leadership b/c the adults interfere so much. Heck they just did a fundraiser. SPL wants to divide the money up by the three patrols and let them purchase equipment they want/need. And one adults stated "They can do that, as long as they get what we want them to get."

The Survey was done in December 2014, and the results published were published in march-April 2015 on page 12 of this document found here: http://www.scouting.org/filestore/advancement_news/2015_Mar-April.pdf Some details of the results: 69% of respondents agreed at some level that the Eagle Palm program is an important factor in retaining Scouts. 80% agreed at some level that Eagle Palms strengthen the unit through continued participation of Eagle Scouts. 85 percent of those polled disagreed with awarding Palms based solely on earning five merit badges. In effect the new policy makes the "insta-palms" soley based on 5 extra MBs. 81 percent rejected the idea of allowing additional active time at Life rank to count toward Eagle Palms. In effect, the new policy does exactly this by awarding palms without 3 months additional tenure as an Eagle. 75 percent rated the three months of tenure as “very important, and another 19 percent rated it as “important.†(OK, I was off a bit with my statement above. but it still is 94% thought 3 months were important.) 78 percent agreed that three months was the proper tenure 80 percent agreed that activity outside the troop or patrol should be allowed in meeting the tenure requirement 87 percent rated the Scout spirit requirement as “very important,†69 percent rated the leadership requirement similarly. Regarding whether or not Bryan's Blog can be considered an official BSA source of policy, that question was asked on one of the blogs comments, and the answer was YES.

Under the FAQs on Bryan's Blog, they give guidance that if you had your EBOR this past Monday or earlier, you have to wait 3 months per palm. Yesterday and onwards, you can have 'insta-palms." And yes, I am part of the 94% who took the poll and opposed "insta-palms."

Again I would not wear it because i didn't go. But I also have enough "bling" that it would not matter. May I offer another option of making it meaningful? I have some very special patches framed and hanging in my office at home. My overseas collections, gifts from Scouts and friends, and some special ones I have earned/received over the years are on display.

1) WELCOME TO DA FORUMS!!!!! 2) Scouters should NOT interfere with the election of a units leaders. Let the Scouts vote and live with the consequences. If you interefere they learn NOTHING (emphasis) The Scouters in my current current troop interfered with unit elections last year. It sets the Scouts in the troop back. if you look at my previous posts, the adults would not let the leaders lead. It got so bad that I thought of restarting a troop that had folded. That interference is still affecting the troop today. The Scouts know what is up. If you truly have a Scout-run troop, they will take unit elections seriously. But if adults constantly jump in and interfere, they will not care. I know of a troop that had a real slacker and trouble maker decide to run for SPL. Scouts knew what was up and he only got 2 votes: his and probably his best friend's vote. 3) good luck

But it appears as if the BSA IS following the way the YMCA went.

Yes fine for you to wear. Most folks don't for the reason Col. Flagg stated.

My advice has always been to get the project over and done with. I know one Scout has 62 MBs and missed earning Eagle b/c of the project, Also know of Scouts waiting to the last minute to do a project, and it's a rush job.

This. Ticks. Me. Off. I did my project as soon as I turned Life.

Don't remind me about those seeking Eagle for the resume. Had one dad tell me he cannot wait for BSA to go coed so his daughter can earn both Eagle and GSUSA's Gold Award.

Sorry about the sarcasm. As you can imagine, I am in total disagreement on this. The palms were meant to be more than bling. They were meant to show going above and beyond by not only earning MBs, but continuing to give back to the Troop by continuing to serve. Now it's bling and has no meaning. If someone works the system, they can wait until they earn all 140+ MBs then have their EBOR, get all the palms, then quit. No further commitment.

I agree make it retroactive to 1927 when they first came out. heck, lets go back to 1912. As you can guess, I was part of the 94% who thought the 3 months tenure per palm as a good thing.

While I'd be cautious after what I've seen happen once, I wouldn't outright turn them down. Besides the troop I grew up in, I was an ASM in 2 other troops before oldest was even born. While I am a Scouting addict I wanted to give back.

1) WELCOME TO DA FORUMS! 2) Paperwork can vary. When I was a DE, I had a pack that took about 3 weeks from start to finish with paperwork. A year later, the troop's paperwork took less than 2 weeks! Another pack I worked on took about 3 months. 3) They key will be getting your troop functioning. Depending upon the guys you have starting up, it can take a short time, or a few years. Troop I'm currently with is about 7 years old. We are finally getting to a good point in my opinion. But we still have a ways to go too. 4) Good Luck.

LOTS of controversy on this one. Especially since it went against 94% of those surveyed.