FireStone

I run recruitment for my Pack and we did an open house with a camping setup back in September. We used the gym at our CO and set the room up with tables in a "U" shape. Scouts/families come in one door, proceed to table #1 (Pinewood Derby building demo), table #2 (fishing gear demo, with glass jar of worms in dirt, which was a huge hit), table #3, and so on, 7 themed tables in all and then a sign-up table at the end. In the center of the "U" of tables we had our indoor campsite. Tent, chairs, sleeping bags, fake campfire (foam logs and rocks made by a leader, fake flame on top with one of those light/fan fake fire things). We used an old tent because as expected, the kids wanted to climb into it and it took some abuse throughout the event. Overall it was a huge success. We doubled the size of our Pack that night. One of our district execs came out and he told me he's never seen a recruitment event like ours. The goal was to bring some of the "adventure" indoors, show families what we do, as best we can show it in a gym at night. I think it worked. I will plan a few things differently next time (I'd still like to figure out an easy way to serve smores without making a colossal mess), but we are already planning to repeat this event with the same format next fall.

I grew up in a unit that kind of shamed other units who allowed fast advancement. The unofficial troop talk was "Oh, yeah, so-and-so's troop is an Eagle factory, they let kids advance too fast." And my troop had a lot of older active scouts, which was nice, but I often wonder if we had it wrong, and should have been more open to allowing advancement at the pace that suited the scout. As an adult, I'm much more open to advancement being allowed at whatever pace suits the scout. What I learned after the fact about my unit as a youth and the other troops in town who had different advancement philosophies is that nothing really bad happened at the units that allowed more "free will" advancement. In fact, the scouts I knew who reached Eagle younger were a lot more likely to do additional things. Some took on other roles in the troop, one even went on to be a district exec. Of the guys from my troop who were doing advancement longer and later because of troop culture, not many are active as adults. In fact some I've spoken to have a sour view on Scouting today and won't put their kids in, in part because of their experience in our troop. I wonder if they had had more control over their scouting timeline and progress if the experience would have been different for them. I suspect a lot of scouts in units where they are hampered not by official requirements but more by troop culture requirements end up feeling frustrated with the experience, or with an overall negative view of their scouting days because of that. So as an adult and a dad of a scout, if my son were having these kinds of issues with troop culture dictating that he wait some additional time to get signed off on something, we'd go looking for a new troop. As a more general approach, I do wish the BSA would communicate more with units on the ground about this, as it does seem to be a common issue. Adding requirements or delaying sign-off is not approved BSA policy, and the only way it stops is if the BSA does something about it. We've seen too many cases where at the local level issues like this are brought up and nothing happens. The scout and/or parents just get labeled as "trouble" or "disruptive", and council rarely takes action. I think it's time for a more broad reinforcement of policy and encouragement of all BSA leaders to do the jobs we're tasked with doing. When a requirement is completed to the satisfaction of what is prescribed in the handbook, we should sign off on it. Period. No additional waiting, no delay. There is so much to do in Scouting, but the focus is so often on Eagle Scout, and it seems like the culture of some troops is to stretch the timeline in parallel to earning Eagle. The idea is something like "We want our Eagles to be 16 or 17." But then scouts just Eagle and age out. I'd really like to see more 14-15-year-old Eagles who then take a couple of years to do other things, earn other awards, take on other roles, etc. And by the way... the troop I was in as a youth, it's gone, closed up due to lack of interest/membership. The so-called "Eagle Factory" troop I mentioned, it's still around, vibrant and active in town. So on the longer timeline, in my personal opinion it seems to me like "free will" advancement is the better and healthier option overall in terms of maintaining an active unit and active scouting culture in town. Scouts are happier, have a better experience, and come back with their kids later in life.

Correction: Scouts BSA unit. Heard about that lawsuit? 😄 As for the rest, as mentioned it's entirely possible that they met previously, discussed the requirements, maybe went over them and practiced. I see no cause for suspicion here. Scout rank is the Bobcat badge of the troop level. Definitely achievable after 1 meeting, especially if the scouts spent any time at all prior reading the materials and/or practicing.

My struggle with a lot of protests is that they often leave me thinking, "What did this accomplish?" In the context of Scouting, I find myself asking that even more. Typically in Scouting we react to problems with action. That's kind of what we ask our scouts to do in all situations, take action, help out, do something. We don't protest hunger or homelessness by making a political statement or gesture, we volunteer at the soup kitchen, we make bag lunches for the homeless shelter, we collect blankets and socks, etc. Even the guy who started the whole "take a knee" movement put money into organizations dedicated to helping with racial injustice, he started a foundation to help minority youth, and he basically sacrificed his career for what he believes. I'd have to ask any scouts participating in the protest, "So what are you going to do now?" What's the next step? If it's just taking a knee to make a statement, in my opinion that's not enough to satisfy the need to do this in uniform. The standards of Scouting are higher than that. If you want to do this kind of protest in uniform, then I would expect to be able to hold you to the high standards of that uniform and ask you what action you're going to take to help.

Fair point. I guess it also is worth considering the age of the scout, and the world view of a 10-year-old. They're still at an age where the very idea of someone being treated poorly makes them want to help and sometimes view the issue through youthfully optimistic eyes. Certainly a 10-year-old is able to understand politics, civics, social issues, etc., I'm just saying that sometimes those issues are viewed at that age in much the same way those issues are written about in school textbooks; in general terms and with very broad brush strokes, and sometimes with a sense of optimism that older kids or adults might not have. I wonder if the mood on this topic would be much different if this story was about a 17-year-old scout. Or a 20-year-old Venturer.

Upvote for the sub-forum idea. 😅

Not the time and place for this. We have specific requirements around flag ceremonies, tied directly to advancement in some cases. (Wolf Duty to Country #1, Bear Paws for Action #1, etc). Scouts are often known for their participation in flag ceremonies, color guard, etc. This doesn't sit right with me. And for the record, I'm politically liberal and generally ok with similar protests. This just doesn't seem like an appropriate venue and circumstance for this protest. We're not a "do whatever you want" organization. We have specific requirements to be a member, things you have to agree to and adhere to. Some of them are directly tied to flag ceremonies and procedures. We're also talking about a child here, not an adult. We can tell our scouts what to do, and if they don't want to do them they are free to leave.

Incredible story, thanks for sharing. "Br Prepared" means a lot of things. You just never know exactly what it's going to mean, and it's why we teach these scouts to be knowledgeable in a variety of things, to be ready to act when others can't. Sometimes it means being ready to give first aid, carry a bag, direct traffic, or sometimes just be prepared to tell others what happened. I had a "Be Prepared" moment last night when I was involved in a hit-and-run car accident. While trying to follow the car that hit me I was thinking "I should have been prepared with a dash cam." And now I will be, my dash cam is going to be on my front porch in an Amazon box when I get home tonight.

Completely agree. And I've said as much in this forum when discussing the subject previously. In many other walks of life I might be more willing to say that credit for past work should be given. But Eagle Scout is a very particular award. It's extremely time-sensitive, and we've all seen or heard of Life Scouts who missed Eagle only because of poor planning/timing. All other requirements complete and yet they come up just short because they started the project too late or took a POR too late. Those scouts fulfilled the requirements in spirit, in some cases they literally did all of the work required, project included. And no exceptions were made. What Sydney is asking for is just such an exception, and it's not right. I rallied for her cause when she insisted she just wanted the same chance as her brother had. She got that chance, and now her terms have changed, she wants something different. I'm not ok with that, especially in the case of an Eagle award because of the long history of very strict requirements and standards that Eagle hopefuls have had to adhere to. What's more, she's making this request for another exception all while insisting that she is a Life Scout, wearing the rank badge in public. To me it's just added insult. Not only does she want special treatment, but she wants to just dictate to the BSA what's what. It's disrespectful.

I think she's wearing the rank because she believes it is her current rank. She (and her unit) are of the belief that she is Life with Eagle application pending. It's not true, but it's what they are saying by going about things this way. What I don't get, then, is why it even matters to them if National were to approve of her early Eagle Rank award or not. They seem ok with just doing whatever they want, regardless of what is true. Why stop at Life? Just say you're an Eagle Scout then. It's not more less true than saying you're a Life Scout. If that's how she and her unit regard rank, I see no reason for them to even bother petitioning National to award her Eagle rank at all. Clearly they don't respect the process of confirming and awarding rank according to BSA policy. So say she's the first Eagle. With Palms. And Silver Buffalo. And whatever else they want to tack on there.

I feel scammed. I really do. I backed her on this journey because she, like all of us in favor of girls in the BSA, voiced our desire for all girls to have the opportunity to do what the boys were doing. Sydney herself often said she just wanted the opportunity her brother had. Well, turns out that was a lie. She wants her own unique opportunity, to earn Eagle on her own special terms. And what the Ireland family asked us to do, supporting the movement to include girls in all levels of BSA scouting, really it was always just about supporting Sydney and her goal to do it on her terms. What a shame. I question if she's even worthy of the Eagle rank anymore. Not that it matters, obviously she has enough adults around her to push through any and all resistance to her getting signed off.

Well that's unfortunate. At least it confirms my suspicion that adults are behind this. Seems like they really do want to make her the "first". Probably will still claim she is even though National won't recognize the SM jumping the gun and signing off.

The rules on wearing the uniform at political events seem more aimed at rallies or events where a particular candidate is being endorsed. The SOTU address is a room full of politicians from various parties, no one in particular is endorsed.

Ugh.. this kind of sucks. I really dislike how this is playing out now. And pardon my speculation, but I think some adults are driving this current controversy. Sydney had my support all along. But if it really is her pushing for this exception, my support is withdrawn. However as mentioned, I have a suspicion that adults are behind this. Maybe troop leaders wanting to have bragging rights to the first female Eagle Scout. Maybe dad who's still yelling about "discrimination and harassment". Who knows. I don't know. It's all just very disappointing. She's not a Life Scout, she can't possibly be. But someone gave her that badge and so my suspicion goes back to the troop. Seems like they went rogue and signed off on her rank. If they could they'd sign off on her Eagle rank, except they need National to approve it, which would be the only reason she wasn't wearing an Eagle badge yesterday. Her dad said something interesting on twitter: "Don’t make girls wait until college to earn Eagle Rank." Is that the motivation? You want her to be able to go to college with the rank all wrapped up and done? Either way, it's all very sad. She accomplished so much and now it will be tarnished by what appears to be adults with ulterior motives.

In related news, Sydney will be in attendance tonight at the State of the Union address as a guest of Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-New York.

I supported Sydney in every effort she made to get into the BSA and have a shot at Eagle. When I wrote letters to BSA executives to urge them to consider changing the rules on allowing girls, I mentioned her by name. Even wrote one letter to Surbaugh exclusively in support of her. But this is where I have to draw the line in support of her goal. While I whole-heartedly applaud her work done so far and her incredible efforts to get this far, I can't support a rubber stamp on her Eagle application for that work. And in the end, I think she'll be glad she had to do it this way, too. Looking back, knowing she went through it as a full member and completed the requirements as prescribed (with the approved time extension), it will make it all that much greater of a success to have achieved so much and done so without any question as to whether she really earned it.

I've been seeing the same. Emails are too easy to just not respond to. I hate to use the term "put someone on the spot" but if we're being realistic about it, sometimes that's what it takes to fill a job.

Thank you for this. Good to see the forum taking this stance.

I was really hands-on with my Den this year for PWD, with half of my den being new scouts. So I talked to every parent, new and returning, and really made sure everyone was sticking to the rules. In those conversations I found out a parent had bought a complete pre-made car, which is against our Pack rules. I let them know that they'd likely be disqualified on the day of inspection, so they went and built a new car with their scout. Problem avoided. Sometimes sending around the rules in an email isn't enough. It should be, everyone should read them. But we all know how that goes. My Pack also does inspections/weigh-ins several days before the derby. All scouts must turn in their cars on that night, and the Pack keeps all cars until race day. This drastically speeds up things on the day of the race, and also gives us more of a chance to potentially deal with any rules issues. It also gives scouts the chance to fix any issues if a car is disqualified. We don't accept late entries, except in the case of a disqualification and a scout has the opportunity to re-submit the car on race day for a one-time re-inspection (if it fails again, no racing).

The BSA did go after the BPSA a bunch of years ago over the use of the word "Scout" in the name. They had to change from "Baden-Powell Scout Association" to "Baden-Powell Service Association." But that wasn't just about selling goods, that was about a new organization forming. Still raises an interesting point, though. If the BSA successfully won that case to protect their rights to "Scout" in a name, wouldn't that mean they were determined to have such rights in the first place? Wonder if that case could in any way be brought into consideration in the GSUSA case.

I'm constantly amazed that in this day and age of having a computer with a built-in video camera in the pocket of so many Americans, complete with the ability to actually EDIT those videos immediately after they're shot, that the media takes any video immediately at face value. Even when this technology was accessible in the home, the learning curve still made it prohibitive for most average folks to use it. But on a phone? Clipping a video, cutting out what you don't want people to see if it hurts the angle you're trying to show, it's easy. Take the tech phenomenon and pair that with the mad rush to get things published, posted, and on-air one millisecond before your competing news organization, and you get the predicament we're in today. Sloppy reporting, rush to judgement, irreparable damage done to reputations based on a minute of editing in a phone. The media is so sloppy. There was a screenshot of a text message that was going around with this video that was a supposed eye-witness account to back up what the video was trying to show, with the boy as the aggressor. But the supposedly "received" text message showed in the screenshot as a "sent" message. It was faked just to further the fake story. And yet the media runs with it. They won't take 2 seconds to look at something and think about whether it even seems legit. Modern journalism is "shoot first, ask questions later, maybe."

What a mess. Sorry you're going through all of this after such efforts to resurrect a Pack. In reading through the thread, all I keep coming back to is the application and background check. Is that still not resolved? Any other point is moot. And how anyone at the district level can approve of this happening is absurd. There is failure up and down the chain here. More than one person should be removed from their position here if you ask me.

Actually there is a change: https://www.scoutshop.org/catalog/product/view/id/10182

If this sticks and the SM gets his way, make sure to remind him when it's time for a Court of Honor that the troop doesn't group things together, and he needs to be present at three different CoHs on 3 different dates/times/places. 😏