David CO

Yes, it is true. But Lone Scouting did not only appeal to boys in rural areas. It also had great appeal to boys in urban areas where BSA had already established traditional units. Many boys preferred LSA over BSA. So much so that a majority of the boys in LSA refused to transfer over to BSA units after the "merger".

Conservative scouters in all of the listed councils join up with a nation wide coalition to revolt against the liberal reformers at BSA. Fox News is giving the revolt positive coverage every night. Sandhill Investments (a venture capital fund) offers a whopping sum to the Victim's Fund contingent on a complete turnover of the boards of national and local councils. The lawyers insist on BSA accepting the offer. The courts approve. Donald Trump mentions the changes in BSA during his second Inaugural speech. Says "scouting is now better that ever before. The best scouting ever. Like nobody has ever seen before." Barron Trump joins scouting and has his picture on the cover of Boy's Life. This prompts boys from all over the country to sign up. Peace and prosperity return to scouting. [clapping]

I have wondered if it might be theoretically possible to have Chartered Organizations involved in Lone Scouts. Maybe a special type of charter allowing a CO to recruit, register, train, and assist Lone Scouts. The CO would represent the Lone Scouts to the council. Just a thought. There are organizations that do this for home schoolers.

Lone Scouting can't be done within a unit. I would have thought that was obvious. Suggesting that we do Lone Scouting within our unit is like saying home schooling is fine, so long as it is done within a public school building. It doesn't make any sense.

I've always felt that die-hard parents are a royal pain in the backside. This is true of scouting, but it is especially true of sports programs.

Membership and money enable BSA to pay exec salaries. I think we give kids too little credit for being able to entertain themselves.

I'm not a lawyer. From a layman's point of view, it seems to me that the current organizational structure is what has put BSA into litigation and bankruptcy. BSA is being held responsible for the actions of its leaders because BSA took an active part in the registration and supervision of leaders. Would that have happened if BSA had used the LSA model of scouting and had no registered leaders?

I know that too. BSA's attention is on membership growth and the $$$ it generates. BSA is not focused on program.

You're still thinking the BSA model of Lone Scouting, rather than the LSA program. LSA had the equivalent of patrols, troops, and positions of responsibility. The LSA model was more fluid. The boys created and ran their own patrols. Very little adult involvement. LSA had no adult "Friend and Counselor" to the Lone Scout. Adults would help out, but they had no official positions like SM, ASM, CC, CM, etc.. LSA was much more involved in promoting literacy. Most of the articles and artwork in Lone Scout Magazine were submitted by kids. Not adults. In addition to the national magazine, they also had regional and local magazines and newsletter published by the kids. In Chicago, the Lone Scouts had a radio show (sponsored by Sears).

Are these the same BSA sources that say we never allowed dodgeball? BSA sources are not always reliable. They have their own agenda to push. The authors of the Wiki article didn't seem to be too clear on the origin of Lone Scouting. The article acknowledged the role played by the newsboys in Chicago, but it sounded unsure about many of the details. Which came first, the newsboys or the farmers? I strongly suspect that the authors read the BSA sources, and were confused by the discrepancies. Having spoken first hand with men who were among the first Lone Scout recruits, I am convinced that LSA started with the newsboys in Chicago.

No sudden shift in heart. I loved being a Lone Scout. I also loved being a scouter for a CO. I can see the benefits and disadvantages in both ways. In a more perfect world, we would have both to choose from, and our primary focus would not be competing for memberships, but on what is in the best interest of the scout.

I agree that BSA would just see this as a competing organization. They would never go along with a split. BSA has a lot of "paper" Chartered Organizations. These are fictional entities that only exist on paper. Their sole purpose is to allow the leaders of new units to complete the chartering paperwork without actually having a Chartered Organization. A Lone Scout program would benefit BSA by allowing BSA to get rid of all of these fictional charters without depriving the scouts of an opportunity to participate in scouting. This, of course, would require both BSA and LSA to adopt a little bit of a Kris Kringle attitude towards each other's scouting programs. If you can't give the Macy's customer what he wants, send him to Gimbles.

The ideal solution for Lone Scouting would be split off Lone Scouts of America into its own separate corporation again. Undo the merger. I can't imagine anyone at BSA would be open to that possibility. I don't know if the bankruptcy court would consider ordering the separation. So the demise of BSA is still the best bet for Lone Scouting.

A talented group of Lone Scouters could probably articulate a mechanism for Lone Scouting to work as a stand alone program. I can't imagine any way it could work within the council structure alongside traditional units. OA doesn't accept Lone Scouts, so they won't be any help.

BSA policy states that Lone Scouting is only for kids who are unable to join a traditional unit. If a traditional unit is available, and if the boy is able to attend traditional unit meetings and activities, he is ineligible to be a Lone Scout. I really do appreciate your conciliatory attitude. It's just not possible. The only likelihood for Lone Scouting to rebound would be for BSA to go under. It really is an either/or scenario.

I don't think so. I was a Lone Scout, and later a member of the Lone Indian Fellowship, an alumni organization made up of former Lone Scouts. I had many opportunities to speak with men who had been amongst the first group of Lone Scouts. If, however, you are speaking of my distorted eyesight, you would be absolutely correct. I had an eye doctor appointment last week, and I need new lenses. Old age is not for wimps.

I know you don't care. You only care about your own program. I don't have the power to change anything. I can't scrap the current patrol method. I'm just a bystander to the bankruptcy. I suspect that if your program gets cancelled, and if you sound angry, people might say that you are simply over reacting. Good luck with that.

That is simply not true. Lone Scouting was originally created in Chicago to serve newspaper boys and other urban working boys. My dad was one of them. He peddled vegetables off of a street cart on the south side of Chicago. As such, he knew a lot of the newspaper boys who sold newspapers on the street corners. They recruited him into Lone Scouting. Many small farmers would bring their crops into the city and sell them to street vendors, like my father. They got to know each other, and Lone Scouting spread to small farmers and agricultural worker in rural communities. By the time BSA bought out LSA, there were more rural Lone Scouts than urban Lone Scouts. There were once 250,000 Lone Scouts. Can you imagine what a difference it would make today if BSA had 250,000 Lone Scouts registered? BSA has distorted the original vision of Lone Scouts. I know that you would like to restore the original vision of Boy Scouting. I wish you would want to restore the original vision of Lone Scouting as well.

Great question. The original vision of Lone Scouting (Lone Scouts of America) was that the organization registers the boy, not the unit. The boy can join or quit a "patrol" or "unit" or "council" without any change in registration. The boy chooses his companions. They are not chosen for him. Lone Scouts did get together to go camping. The patrol method was used. Lone scouts were expected to be more self-reliant. They were expected to pay their own way. Very little in the way of fund raising. Very little physical infrastructure. Lone Scouting was more like pick-up-games than organized sports leagues. We still played the game, and we played by the rules, but we didn't have umpires and coaches and sponsors to contend with.

Unemployment might well be the result, but it is not the goal. You are right about one thing. I am willing to see all of the execs unemployed if that is what it takes to fix scouting.

Most execs feel that way. They're wrong. Schools say exactly the same thing about home schooling.

True. Lone Scouting does not follow B-P model. Lone Scouts of America did have something similar to patrols. They were more flexible and boy organized. Little adult supervision.

I disagree. I think the structure and design of Lone Scouts was better. If BSA had adopted more of the Lone Scout program, it would have greater appeal to this generation of scouts. Today's families are less likely than previous generations to join programs that have a fixed schedule of activities. They want more flexibility. Lone Scouting offers that flexibility. Some councils won't even register boys who want to participate as Lone Scouts. They would rather have declining membership than a strong Lone Scout program. If BSA goes under, a new scouting program along the lines of Lone Scouting could be very successful. It would need some modernization, though. A hybrid program consisting of both traditional units and lone scouting would be best. But if unit scouters and council execs won't allow a hybrid program, I think lone scouting could make it on its own.

I think all of the forum members have the intelligence to recognize that. To suggest otherwise is condescending.

No. It would be totally inappropriate to behave cheerfully while talking about child sexual abuse. It would be wrong to act in a friendly manner to the molesters or to those who helped to covered up their crimes.