Eagle94-A1

I know back in the day, DEs were required to visit each IH and talk with them about the unit(s) they charter. One DE I know did 3 such visits until he was reprimanded for "wasting your time visiting."

That is a relatively new change in Charter Agreements. Within the past 5 years if memory serves. Prior to that time, it belong to the CO. And with the way the pros are running BSA into the ground would you trust them?

The research behind FIRST CLASS,FIRST YEAR, has some flaws in it. The first flaw I recognized in it as a 15 year old Life Scout was that the research has no mention of activity levels of the units in the research. Not a one. If you got an active unit, you will have retention and advancement. As Hillcourt said, "OUTING is three-fourths of ScOUTING." And if you are active they will stay. And as as Lord Baden-Powell said, " Advancement should happen as naturally as a suntan, it just happens in the outdoors." The other thing flaw was including LDS units in the research. As I discovered later in life, LDS troops kept their 11 year old Scouts in a separate patrol, with an ASM and a Troop Guide assigned to them. I have been told there was a regimented program established for them where the 11 year old patrol did the same thing year after year. And that program was hyperfocused on getting Scouts to First Class by the time they turned 12. In many traditional Scouters' opinions, it was more Cub Scouts and not Boy Scouts, with the ASM acting more like a Den Leader, and the Troop Guide acting like a Den Chief. And that skewered the research. And since all male youth in the LDS church were automatically registered as Scouts, this further skewed the data.

In 1972, Skill Awards came out and were required for Tenderfoot through First Class. Skill Awards focused on all of the skills in one specific area, and were immediate recognition because you still had the tenure requirements for Tenderfoot through First Class ranks. If you finished the Skill Awards needed for rank advancement before the tenure requirement was completed, you usually worked on the next batch of Skill Awards while you waited. In August 1989, "OPERATION FIRST CLASS" came about. Skill Awards were done away with, and the requirements spread out through the Tenderfoot through First Class ranks. So instead of focusing on one to two sets of skills and mastering them, you worked on a bunch of skills at the same time. Also the tenure requirements were removed, allowing for one person to go from Scout to First Class after about a month or 2 of program in one night. That situation did in fact happen. Scout joined in May, went to June and August campouts and summer camp's first year camper program. Since this was a new situation for us, we had 3 different BORs for him that night. We found out later, you can do one BOR for all three ranks. Not a fan.

Age should not be a matter.

Could the $500,000 per POC fine could be used to add more money for the victims?

Can they also be fined and/or pay for this case forfeited and applied to the victims? I'm all for imprisonment, but would rather hit them where it really hurts, money, and benefit the victims.

Record retention laws vary not only from location to location, but also what type of record and the information on it. It can vary from 3 to 50 years, and some records longer. Our COR is a records retention guru. When we purged our records, he told us to keep everything 7 years and under. Anything 8 years or older could be purged.

I would call it a sloppy use of words IF no one at National was informed about this. HOWEVER, RichardB, and others, were notified of the error as early as February 2018 when the ban went into effect. Yet the untruth, fib, hoax, deception, misinformation, disinformation, misinformation, fabrication, etc remains. Wait, it will come. In my experience, National will start a ban for one activity, and slowly move on to others.

Here is the chart. https://filestore.scouting.org/filestore/healthsafety/pdf/680-028.pdf Lions ( ages 5 or 6) and Tigers (ages 6 or 7)are prohibited from using hand held paint brushes (that will put a damper on those packs that do PWD workshop nights where everyone is working on their PWD cars, including painting them in some cases). And only Webelos and older can use paint rollers.

@RichardB I know better than to not follow the rules. So I do my best to keep up with BSA policies to the point that I have often had to tell my council's professional staff what is and is not allowed by BSA as they are not aware of the latest rules. My biggest problem is that BSA continues to break the first point of the Scout Law, Trustworthy, with the repeated lie in the FAQ found here https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/prohibited-activities-faqs/ , that "Dodgeball has never been an authorized activity in Scouting." As I have shared with you and others repeatedly THAT IS A LIE (emphasis). You may recall that I first brought up the lie to you when I shared with you the Troop Program Resources book's link on the Scouting.org website stating Dodgeball, and several variants, was an approved game AFTER the prohibition came about and the lie was mentioned the FAQ. You may recall you thank me for pointing it out, and then promptly had the book removed. If national was to remove the lie and simply state: "Games and sports that involve participants throwing objects at each other, including dodgeball, have caused concussions and traumatic brain injuries, broken bones, and ankle injuries. There is also an aspect of bullying in the game, which has led to its removal from other youth-serving organizations. We are monitoring the results of gaga ball; at this time, we consider gaga ball appropriate if the activity is set up, monitored, and supervised following manufacturers’ guidelines. " I would have no problem. But whomever is creating the FAQ is not being Trustworthy. If you can get that altered, I would very greatly appreciate it. And I hope you have a great Thanksgiving too.

I agree, it National wants units to know about it, it needs to be in the G2SS and other unit accessible literature, not in NCS books that most units never see. Theoretically, the councils are suppose to pass along the info. At least in my current council, it is usually the volunteers who are telling the council what the rules are. Heck my district was informed at camporee that about 85% of the skits, the majority of which have been around forever, are not longer allowed according to new NCS guidelines .

No, the #1 used camp is the old summer camp that has turned "rustic" with cap improvements being done by the OA and individual units. Until 2019 that camp actually subsidized the main camp via the usage and logging. In 2019, it was closed for 9 months while they repaired a road. Council tried to say that camp cost nearly $70/camper to maintain, but used the 2019 camping numbers, which only had 3 months of camping due to the road, as well as the capital expense of the road included in figuring out the $70/ Camper. In fact another council camp was only used once during 2019, and that was because the district camporee had to be moved to that one because the most used camp was still closed. And no, not all councils take care of their Cubs. We have 4 camps, and I have been to 3 of the them. Out of three, only 1 meets all Cub Scout requirements. Do not know about the third.

Regarding the multi units from CO rule, that has been around since at least 2002, but it was in the NCS literature, not G2SS. Ditto the Cub Family Camping rules, although some councils never really did much to promote Cub Camping. Heck I remember one Camping Committee member back in the day saying Cubs don't need to camp. As for Councils not providing stuff, the #1 used camp over the past 20 years do not have showers, which was a requirement until recently, nor enough bathrooms. And my council never had a list of approved Cub campgrounds. So several packs used the OA's Where to Go Camping book to select campgrounds.

Thank you. The word earned should have been in quotations marks. Like many others, i have had Scouts stick arpund after earning Eagle because we had . Thank you. The word earned should have been in quotations marks. Like many others, i have had Scouts stick arpund after earning Eagle because we had .

Sadly the drive for MBs is turning off my Scouts. They seeing folks with all 130+ merit badges being earned in under 2 years, especially during COVID, is frustrating, angering, and discouraging them. They know the MBUs, online courses, and even a few summer camps, are giving away MB. Here are the guys earning them the right way by actually doing the requirements and not just by attending a class. I have had 3 conversations to date about this. One got so frustrated, he almost gave up on Eagle because it no longer meant anything because "everyone is getting it." I used @Jameson76 approach: focus on your adventure, and choices; and don't worry about what anyone else is doing.

As others have mentioned, the G2SS is constantly being updated, to the point that even the professionals cannot keep up with all the changes (kinda sad when I have to tell the SE something is no longer allowed in the GTSS) Prior to 2012, patrols could camp on their own without adults. UP to 2018, patrols could do day activities: meetings, hikes, grocery shopping, etc, on their own without adults. So back in our day, what happened with your troop, your older Scouts taking over without adults, was perfectly acceptable. While @RichardB is a product of the program and should know how the program is supposed to work, I wonder sometimes if A) his involvement was during the screwed up "Improved Scouting Program" fiasco that took the outing out of Scouting and he did not get a true Scouting program ( saw that happen with some SMs and ASMs I trained and/or worked with who did not understand why camping was important), or B) if his time as a health and safety guy has blinded him to how the program is supposed to work. And I am still upset that the lie that Dodgeball has never been an approved activity is still posted in the FAQ, Not only do I have published works with Dodgeball and its variants as approved games, but also pointed out to him on the Scouting.org website AFTER THE BAN WAS PUT IN PLACE (emphasis) that dodgeball and several variants were an approved games on their website. Like 1984, the information that BSA did approve Dodgeball was quickly removed. Those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it. The 1970s' Improved Scouting Program fiasco shows what happens when you take the outing out of Scouting. Back then, William "Green Bar Bill" Hillcourt was alive, and saved Scouting when he came out of retirement to write the 1979 Handbook. As for "family scouting," I saw what it almost did to my old troop. COR had to intervene to keep it a traditional troop. If "family scouting" is what we turn into, I see a 100 year old troop folding, and many others. Something similar happened to a friend of mine. As SPL, he ran the troop without any adults. At 18, he was de facto SM and was doing such a good job, remained the SM for over 60 years. Sons and grandsons of his original Scouts were in the troop.

In my 36 years being involved with Boy Scouts/Scouts BSA, only 1, again ONLY 1, has ever said the Outdoor Code as a part of their opening and/or closing ceremony. They do keep the Scout Sign up for it.

What's recruiting? Seriously we have been unable to get into schools for several years. When i was active with the pack,, and could get onto the schools, we would usually be finished recruiting by this point and have 20÷ new cubs. My old pack had 1 new Lion. Council has not helped in this matter. In the past they would not allow units to do their own recruiting. Council i came from wanted units to do their own. But this one does not, and it has been like that for over 20 years.

So you do not want parents going camping with their kids? That's the reason why the 72 hour rule was put into place. At the Cub Scout level, it is family camping. Scout, Sea Scout, and Venturing levels, while not family oriented, as @elitts stated is suppose to be open to parents observation.

Whatever they are registered on the charter as is the award they work on.

Worse threat I have encountered involved an extension for Eagle. Long story short, Life Scout majorly screwed where he was kicked off the benefitting organization's property, and professionals had to intervene ASAP to fix the mess he caused. This was a week or two before his birthday. Scout wanted an extension to do a second project. Troop said he would have to petition National for an extension. And all hell broke lose with mom. She belligerently threatened to go to the media, get outside organization involved, and sue everyone: SM, CO, Council and National, if the extension was not granted.

Good luck with finding a new CO. And no you are not alone. Besides the UMC churches, i know 1 church has given their units either until the end if the school year (mid june) or charter (next month) before they need to leave. The District Commissior and unit leaders have approached 2 possible COs, one of them wanting Scouting about 2-3 years ago. Both said no. I So no, you are not alone.

I had a friend who was a web designer and owned his own company. Had a fortune 500 company or two as clients. He did one council's webpage for free, and it was one of the most user friendly websites. Then National mandated a set format and program for all council websites. And here we are today: Websites that suck. Agree we got to get back to the outdoors. "OUTING is three-fourths of ScOUTING." We cannot be all things to everyone. Sadly that is partially true in my neck of the woods. Our professional staff is down, but instead of focusing on helping existing units survive, the pros are being told to start new units and get membership up EVEN THOUGH NATIONAL HAS REPORTED LOSSES FOR THE NEXT 2-3 YEARS! (caps for emphasis). My DE is being told to start 10 NEW units, yet in one town alone you have 4 UMC units that are concerned what is going to happen after March, and one CO that is kicking their units out at the end of the charter year and are desperate to find a home. Yet the DE is not involved. District Commissioner has already tried 2 organizations and they both said NO. As for the new type of volunteer, no the council wants "yes men." Folks who question council do not get their names past the Nominating committee.

We all hope @CynicalScouter is doing well.