Eagle94-A1

Why do I think National Supply is thinking this will be a bonanza of sales with all the options for the girls? We have sold skorts and skirts in the past, and they were not popular at all. I remember when we had a sales on them, and still no one was buying them. In my 3-4 years with Supply, I sold 4 pairs, and they went to the manager and assistant manager. But if the girls can wear skirts, I will start wearing a kilt. Specifically this one: But I bet the council's commissioner corps will get a tad bit upset. For whatever reason, they adopted my clan's tartan as a local recognition for outstanding commissioner service. And they even got permission from the clan chief at the time to do it.

BSA dress uniforms are these: All programs but Sea Scouts Sea Scout Dress Whites Sea Scout Dress Blues: BSA field uniforms are these: Cub Scouts Boy Scouts Venturing Old Fogeys There is a push for Sea Scouts to wear this one: but many ships still wear this one

Shirts are hideous. Skirts are not practical in the field, so I don't know why they are event making them for a "FIELD uniform" (caps for emphasis) And what's up with the red? And what is up with the tabs on the p[ants? Forgot to add, is it me, are does the pockets on the pants look like they should be on the backside and not the front.

I would like to think the LDS Church will help their members who are pros find new jobs. Heck you BYU has a minor for their business majors, and as masters in nonprofit management, whihc I was told was designed to prepare folks to be DEs originally.

Having been a pro and dealing with membership stats, I feel for all the pros in heavy LDS districts and councils. Doesn't matter that this is not their fault, they will be held accountable for the loss from the powers that be, it wil affect their abilities to transfer and get priomoted, etc.

As others have stated, BSA is changing, and is turning into we either do not like, or do not agree with. We see BSA changing the rules and moving the goalposts furhter and further, or changing rules to make things easier. And of course, changing the rules that make traditions and traditional Scouting activities no longer able to be done. I admit I am a selfish old man. I want my sons to have similar opportunities that I had as a Boy Scout. I am in it for them. I have mixed emotions on this topic. One one hand I see the addition of girls as harmful. I see double standards appearing, I see boys' "safe space" going away, and I see the gradual diminishment of boys in the program. I am also remembering the challenges and frustrations I had as a Sea Scout in a coed ship back in the day. I am also remembering some of the "challenges" I encountered and dealt with as an associate adviser with coed Explorer Posts/Venturing Crews. I know there will be "fire watches" when the girls arrive. But I also saw how Scouting is done overseas. Yes I saw some challenges, but overall it was not as bad as what I encountered here in the USA. So there is some hope. But in all honesty I see National fouling up this process so badly, That there is not much hope there.

In my neck of the woods, FOS is down. Heck my district goal this year is the same as it was when I was a DE 19 years ago, and we have not met it yet! My district committee is down to 4 active people, and that includes the DE. Folks are not supporting the changes over the years, and it is hurting.

I like TT's idea, and recommend https://www.sageventure.com/store/blanket.html for custom patches. They did the ones for my troop's necker.

Have not seen the results of our troop's poll, but this is what I am hearing. Small die hard group against a "Linked Troop" girl's and a small die hard group for "Linked Troop" with girls. While the overwhelming majority think this is a mistake, they d do not have a problem with girls starting a separate troop and having nothing to do with the boys. Yes, I am hearing complaints from the Scouts about too many parents and a Cub Scout sibling constantly camping with the troop.

Yes you stated that girls will not be in boys' troops. And I will state again with that those units that are "Linked Troops" will be coed troops in reality.

Agree that Official BSA neckers after a certain time, I want to say 1972 are too small to be really useful. I know a few years back, BSA started making properly sized triangle neckers, and then they stopped. In 4 years as a Scout, the troop went through 4 neckers. The first 3 were discontinued by BSA. Current one is a custom, handmade one using a patch from Sage Ventures and military triangle bandage. Even when hemmed, the necker can still be used for first aid As for why triangle vs. square, 1/2 the necker = 1/2 the cost of production.

With all due respect, 2 words: "LINKED TROOPS" (emphasis) let's face it, if 2 troops share a CO, Share a committee, share ASMs, share meeting nights and location, share activities, and share cam,pouts, is it really 2 separate troops? No it isn't, it is one coed troop, despite what the paperwork says. .

Oh it will be a race, and someone will try and claim to be the very first. Heck I bet some EBOR will do one at Midnite August 1 2020 to claim it. Although an evil thought has popped into my mind To reward those ladies who followed the rules and joined Venturing, automatically give them credit for First Class, and any Venturing awards that have similar OR easier Boy Scout MB requirements, give them the MBs. That would narrow down the playing field in the race to Eagle.

From what I am reading, they are learning the skills now so that once Feb 1st comes, they can demonstrate them and earn the rank. I agree, getting Eagle should not be a race, but a journey. I talk about my cousin nd how he Eagled and quit at 13, and thus missed out on a heck of a lot whereas I Eagled at 18, and had so much fun I never really quit.

Since 1989 when they removed the time requirements for T-2-1 ranks, I've seen 1 Scout make it in 6 months, and then he had 3 BORs in the same night! This was in 1990 right after the requirements changed and we did not know we could have 1 BOR for all three ranks.

Actually the bare minimum of time to go from Scout to First Class is 3 months, and that is for the physical fitness requirements ( 1 month each for Tenderfoot, Second Class, and First Class. So the absolute earliest for First Class if Girls start on Feb. 1 would be May 1st, 2019 September 1st for Star, March 1st for Life, and August 2020 the earliest for a female Eagle. looking around Facebook, there are troop that have siblings already working on advancement so that as soon as they are allowed to join, they can get rank ASAP.

WOW. Just WOW!

That is not the case in my neck of the woods. We lost another unit over the issue, and are about to lose a second. We had lost a bunch of volunteers with the last membership change, and are still trying to replace them. It is now even harder because of the girls issue. Most of the troops in my district do not want to have anything to do with girls or being "linked troops." 2 troops, which had packs fold over the last membership policy change, have expressed concerns that when their packs restart, they will be coed, and they will be forced to become "linked troops" with girls. As for my troop, the SM meets with the IH today. He told me he believes the CO will go coed, BUT the overwhelming majority of those polled, Scouts, Parents, and Others ( committee members, ASMs without kids, Webelos, etc) do NOT want to be a "linked troop" and that if the girls want their own troop, they are OK with it, as long as they do not meet or camp with the boys. We'll see how long that stays, as I believe @David CO is correct, BSA is slowly going to a coed program at all levels.

Regarding units being told what to do, I know that, But I have a feeling the DE contacted our IH about the matter directly. Contacted the SM today, and the meeting is tomorrow, but htere is a 99.99999% chance of us going coed. And I agree, packs that do not go coed will be at a disadvantage. Ditto with all male troops that are not "Linked Troops" with an all female troop. Let's be "TRUSTWORTHY" and admit "linked troops" sharing meeting nights, activities, committees etc are really coed troops.

A few comments, 1) FYI Pros are suppose to contact the IH at least once a year to discuss their units. I also know a lot of DEs don't do that because "you have more important things to do waste your time talking to existing units" as my old boss told me. 2) I agree that calling an IH out of the blue and demanding an answer in a week is outrageous, especially since BSA has not provided enough guidance on the matter for some COs to make the decision. 3) I think this is happening a lot of places because my DE at RT the other day told me my son's pack will be coed, and the pack at my other sons' CO will also be going coed, and the CMs of both packs have not talked to the IHs yet.

Thanks for the links. For some reason, when I searched h for the instructor syllabus, the pre 2017 version came up. Looks like a major revision too. Going to talk to the SM about it because he took the course last summer, and didn't mention any basic vs river differences. So this may be the first camp season the revised course is being offered. Glancing over the requirements for river certification, I know some camps will have issues unless they go off site. I know the camp I grew up at a, as well as the camp I got the Aquatics Supervision Course at, does not have the river facilities to priovide certification unless goping off site.

Could you provide a link to the 2 levels of AQUATICS SUPERVISION:PADDLECRAFT because when I took the class, and attempted to get recertified, there was no distinctions. This was 4 and 2 years ago respectively.

THAT IS 110% ACCURATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Starting a unit to last is extremely hard. And getting a troop Scout led is not only harder, but also more time consuming, 3-5 years IMHO. When I was a pro, I started 6 units. Within a year 3 folded due to lack of volunteers. As for Rogue Packs and Troops, some folks against girls joining will say it is because of these Rogue Packs and Troops that we are now in this situation.

Actually from the survey we are taking, and the results are not final BTW, we have a diehard group for coed, and group with major reservations about going coed, and the majority not liking the idea of girls joining, but will deal with it. My own sons are in the latter category to a degree. If there are problems with cancelled trips due to not having enough female Scouters, they will transfer out. And I will not be going on any camp outs with girls unless a female ASM is present per my understanding of the proposed BSA policy. Your original question was " Isn't the BSA's core product a youth leadership and character-development program with an outdoor focus? Is that changing?" While girls are getting the bulk of attention now, Exploring and STEM Scouts preceded it, and in some areas ar egetting a lot more attention that traditional programs, again until girls were added. They do not have an outdoor component. As I stated, I am willing to give it a try. However I am not willing to go camping with girls unless a female SM, or a female ASM over 21 years of age, is also in attendance. i do not beleive that calling a camp out a "family camp out" with girls' dads in attendance would be YPT2 compliant. Not going to put myself into a position where an accusation can ruin my life as it did to a friend of mine when one "Scout" accused her of making a pass at him because she caught him being a peeping Tom at the female shower area. Despite a criminal investigation clearing her, her reputation was destroyed in the community, and she was permanently placed in the Ineligible Volunteer Files.

As long as the blade is under 60", it's OK. See this Official BSA website for information https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2013/04/01/blade-length/