OaklandAndy

My guess is that National always puts the cart before the horse. I've noticed that since I started volunteering in 2017. It happens frequently that now it's the new norm.

My issue is that they advertised it as a "winter camping experience"...and while I understand the risk, there is also preparation that goes into it and if a family couldn't prepare for the cold, I would think that common sense would tell them to come for the day and not the overnighter. Either way, for those units/families do did prepare (money spent on gear/food), there wasn't even an option to stay overnight. Small marines...that's a stretch. But I understand the exaggeration.

That's what I was thinking too...besides outright "laziness", which seems to be more common. I took our 4/5 graders out a couple years ago for a overnight winter campout on a weekend where it was snowing and got below freezing and they had a blast. To be honest though, I thought they were all going to tell their parents that they wanted to leave because of the cold, but they didn't and really accomplished a lot that weekend. I was hoping this event would have a similar effect, however, this council disappoints once again. They may have their hands tied, but why offer it in the first place? The weather conditions could not have been better for this time of year. No wind, cold yes, but no rain either. I often think about scouting in other areas where it stays predominately "too hot" or "too cold" and wonder if units are striking the whole camping experience just because of the weather conditions. I wouldn't think so, but with @skepticcomment about CYA, are we going to see more of it?

Our council recently held a winter camping experience for our Webelos/AOLs this past weekend. It's a patrol-led event with "frosty" fun. 2 nights before the event, an email was sent out saying that the overnight portion is cancelled due to the temperature (forecast was a low of 17 degrees). I wanted to get your thoughts on this as I feel that the overnight portion should not have been cancelled due to weather. Units who properly prepared for this should've of been able to handle the cold weather, not to mention the money that was already spent to have the proper gear and meals. I think that the option to camp overnight could've been switched to optional for those units who did not prepare adequately. What are your thoughts? What other information did I not consider to justify the decision by the council?

I finished mine last fall, one of the better trainings that I've been to so far. Volunteering dynamics became a LOT easier once I networked with other leaders and focused in on what I needed to do to be a better leader for our scouts, volunteers, and parents.

I've got a buddy who is looking for an old Boy Scout axe with the logo on it. Seeing how many of you have been involved way longer than I have. where can I find one for him? I thought it would make a pretty cool Christmas present. Thanks!

Patrol, my bad. Dang military slang is still hard to get rid of after all these years.

Completely agree. It's a big deal for the little ones. We "solved" this issue by letting them pick out their squad patch (dragon, moose, etc.) and come up with a creative name. It seems to be working as we retain most of our older kids who've been in the program for 3+years at that point.

Well that's just funky. You are correct, only the COR can hold 2 positions within a unit. Being a UC does not automatically make you a committee member by any virtue. They can be an ASM or CommMem, but not both, at least not on paper. If they are wearing multiple hats and fulfilling different roles, that's one thing, but still only 1 position on paper. At least that's my understanding. If it becomes an issue, that would be something your CC and COR to discuss.

What makes an area/community eligible to participate in the ScoutReach program? I'm sure there is some type of income cap for the area, county, or something like that. All I find online is brochures about participating, but no set requirements outside leadership requirements and charter stuff.

100% worth it. I taught Rifle/Shotgun during summer camp for 2 years, with some other events outside of camp, and the look on their faces when it "clicks" is satisfying EVERY.SINGLE.TIME. Feed the bureaucracy their paperwork so you, and the scouts, can reap the rewards.

I haven't looked at the SSM in awhile, but I know as of last year, you don't even need an RSO to run a range during summer camps. Outside summer camps, yes. During...no. Hmm.

We are pretty remote. They paid a couple hundred thousand to run fiber optic under/above ground for about 3 miles. But I guess we're not that remote if we were able to get it. Just expensive!

Our camp upgraded it's wifi to help leaders who need to work. While it's only accessible from "base camp" and not at the campsites, it seems that the password gets leaked to the scouts and they end up sitting all over the place. It turned into an "encampment" and it was disturbing. Resolving one situation created another one.

Totally agree! We actually work with the local multicultural community center in town. We are starting our first, hopefully not last, pack yard sale with all proceeds going to the center to help support their after-school and summer programs. In turn, hopefully we have enough exposure to recruit some of those youth that go to the center. If not, oh well. That was never the aim anyways.

I feel this so much where I'm at. This statement right here is 100% true. As a pack, we have done all we can do make the program as "free" as possible. This includes offering sponsorships for families with multiple youth and just can't afford it, paying for all the program fees, reducing the "requirement" for a complete uniform, and doing away with annual unit dues. Luckily, we have lots of participation with fundraisers and this is the only way we can keep the program affordable in our rural town. Sometimes, I feel like we are doing what the council should be doing. Right now, we're looking into getting a pack neckerchief so they don't have to buy a new one every year. But that'll come down to a pack vote.

No, you are raising moderator awareness for something that has not happened. I never said anything about silencing folks on here or even referenced moderators to begin with. And when asked about silencing them, I gave an example on when I would think they would step in. In-person issues that have not happened? They are and continue to happen. Do I point them out on here? No, I don't even know who anyone is. I address it as I encounter them IRL. Nonsense? No haha. But now I know where you stand.

What happens on this forum is not for me to decide nor is it my place to "ask". It's a public forum. I would think the moderators would silence those who become aggressive and threatening. Neither do I and I hope no one ever would. Outside this forum is another story.

Upset, not at all. I just don't understand why people would say they support all youth in scouting then turn around and discuss why they disagree with having those very same youth in the program. "Can you show me the results of the membership (emphasis) survey that had the majority support current membership policies, because I have been looking for years." No, I can't. I assumed National did their due diligence so that's on me for thinking so.

I have not been around as long as most, I'm sure. Having these discussions here without the "key players", those who make these kind of decisions at the National level, is not input. Just discussion among concerned members. I didn't think I would have to say it but when the actions and decisions made by the organization are just plain wrong, they obviously you have to speak up. It's not "eyes of the beholder" when the majority agrees. We're not talking about purging people who disagree, we're talking about purging those who take actionable steps against the mission of serving youth. Then clearly we're miscommunicating somewhere.

No, because most of those decisions are made without actual input from it's members. Plus, advocating for others to join, which is an obvious positive, is different from suppressing the change when it would lead to a positive outcome. I'm not saying you have to agree with their identity or lifestyle, but everyone should agree that were here to serve the youth in the world. However, if you don't agree and you can't contain it, then why be that person?

Isn't that what the topic is? It sounds like members have an issue with them in Scouting period, not necessarily in their unit or CO. Which goes back to my original point. What the CO decides is correct, however, your CO's decision doesn't speak for the entire organization, which is what is happening here.

The way I see it, when you register (or re-register) as an adult leader, you are agreeing to uphold the decisions and responsibilities mandated by the organization, regardless of your personal feelings. If you can't do that, then you leave the organization (like so many already have) and carry on with your life. No different from any other private membership organization. Yes, change takes time. But getting use to the change and refusing to are completely separate feelings. And in the eyes of the organization, they are going to move on with or without you.

The "new" lineup of MB's is pretty creative...emoji deciphering haha.

I assume AI will be the one to overreact the most lol.