desertrat77

It may indeed be simplistic. But it's true for many.

Very true. There are lots of great volunteers who have been disrespected by pros, and they vote with their feet.

Agreed, in the camporee example, the pro should talk to the Key 3. But many pros either they don't care or there is a crew of unpleasant but long-tenured district vols that are difficult to deal with. They are running things into the ground and it's easier just to avoid the subject altogether. Or their responsibilities at the council level are such that even if they wanted to bolster the next camporee or heaven forbid even attend, they don't have the time. If professional responsibilities have ballooned to the point where they can't or won't care about unit level scouting, it's time to reevaluate what is truly value added.

I've found pros that don't care how bad their council service is in these areas. They only deal with peers or those above them. Vols and vol concerns are dismissed or held at arms length. Not an ideal way of motivating your leaders in the field.

Actually, I think you missed my point...at any level--unit, district, or council--if these mundane things are not being done, or being done in a substandard manner, the pros should have a vested interest in getting them fixed. At some point a pro will have to set the right vision, recruit the right vols, and offer the appropriate resources and support so these things get done. Or it definitely will impact their fiefdom. The pro/vol relationship dynamic and duty breakout should not be planets apart.

Agreed, the pros have their duties. However, in my travels and scouting experiences, I've seen many pros that are so completely focused on their insular world of professional scouting that they've forgotten or never knew what scouting is really all about. I've dealt with several pros who have had nothing but open contempt for anything that happens in the field, and especially toward unit level scouters that called attention to council shortcomings (poor service to units, low quality summer camp, etc). Yes, the pros are focused on money and manpower but somehow many of them don't realize they can't do anything without the "great unwashed"--unit level scouters and the overworked DEs. Camporees, timely processing of paperwork at the council office, training schedules, the quality of food at the council camp...while these things seem mundane to pros, they directly impact the things they are chasing most--numbers.

In the various councils I've belonged to, I've generally found the professional staff (above DE level) to be quite resistant to input from the field. They are either in problem admiration mode or dismissive. I fully understand that sometimes the answer is no, but open dialogue is not their strong suit. One way communication. This culture extends up to National as well. As @Eagle1993 mentioned earlier, this is a definite need for more transparency.

Excellent point. I haven't seen anything. I agree, a message is traditional. My hunch, based on Mr. Mosby's prior experience, he probably has a message ready but the BSA "newsroom" is taking their time publishing it. Looking through their archives, the newsroom has published five (5) articles since 20 Jun 2019. Their last blog post was from July 2018. https://www.scoutingnewsroom.org/ Given the tidal waves of negative publicity the BSA has faced over the last 2 years, one would think the official news center of Irving would be a bit more proactive.

I'm not sure but I rather doubt it. Same mindset in the several councils I've belonged to. They'll champion Cub Scouting all day long. And STEM, Eagle Scout, FOS and popcorn. Everything else? Scant attention.

I believe @Eagle1993 hit the nail on the head.

Most of these are essential services at an executive level. My contention is these functions are staffed with too many high paid managers and not enough worker bees. Also, some of these departments are quite inefficient and need a shake up in what they do and how they do it.

My concern is the number of pros receiving said salaries, the upshot being many of them are performing duties that contribute very little benefit to units in the field. Executive level busy work.

I can't recall witnessing a situation where a scout was solely focused on earning MBs. Usually, if they are determined to collect a ton of badges, Eagle is also on their "to earn" list.

From the Boy Scout Handbook, seventh edition, seventh printing, January 1971, page 357: "Your advancement through Second and First Class ranks was a natural outgrowth of your patrol and troop experiences. In merit badge advancement you are on your own [italics added]. "Why do we have merit badges in Scouting? For two main reasons: to encourage you to increase your skill in things you like to do and to give you a chance to try out new activities that may result in new interests.... "Many men who were once Scouts feel that their entire lives were influenced by their merit badge work. Dr. Paul Siple, who was a Scout went with Admiral Richard E. Byrd on his expedition to the South Pole, first became interested in science through his merit badges...Hundreds of doctors, engineers, forest rangers, and naturalists had their ambitions kindled while earning merit badges as Scouts. You, too, may start on your lifework by working on a merit badge." And in the spirit of the holidays, I'll even give the anemic ISP a little recognition. Scout Handbook, eighth edition, first printing, 1972, pages 72 - 73, re merit badges: - Pick a Subject: "...Find out from your Scoutmaster who the counselor is for that badge...." - Call the Counselor: "Get a signed merit badge application from your Scoutmaster. Phone the merit badge counselor and tell him you want to earn the badge. He may ask you to come and see him so he can tell you what he expects...." - Show your Stuff: "When you are ready, call the counselor again to make an appointment...Most counselors like to meet with Scouts more than once...." - Get the Badge: "When the counselor is satisfied, he will sign your application...."

@skeptic, you mentioned the PTC. While I'm against the big family camping push, the PTC is one place where it works. Mom/Dad take courses and the kiddos are engaged in age-appropriate outdoor activities with qualified staff all day. At night, everyone has dinner and then it's family time. But outside the PTC? A big "no" from me. The BSA is already suffering from watered-down programming, adult-led everything, and restrictions on many outdoor activities that used to be the norm as well as huge recruiting draws.

I'm sure there is calculated risk management afoot on National's part. Less legal risk for the BSA if mom/dad/guardian are/is present somewhere in the vicinity and Johnny/Suzy Scout gets hurt. Plus, for decades, the BSA has downplayed outdoor adventure and the patrol method. This is the unfortunate result of consistently recruiting pros and vols that have zero interest in such things. The ISP promoters of '72 are finally realizing their "dream." It's all part of National's big push to turn the BSA into One Big Tiger Cub Den.

True, the family camps are high quality with great staff. However, sign ups were extremely low this last summer (sorry I don't have exact numbers). Even with a significant increase in family sign ups, the fees would barely cover costs. Edited to add: I'm shocked--shocked--they didn't mention hocking Philmont! 🤕

The BSA needs new professional leadership. The professional staff, above the DE level, has become insular and tone deaf, completely disengaged from the nuts and bolts of unit level scouting. And gold loop business/management/accounting/communication/human relation/budgeting skills? Atrocious. "Sell more popcorn" they tell the units. National didn't sell one tin of popcorn before they pawned Philmont.

The BSA is blazing a bright future indeed! These pros are Irving TX bound, no doubt in my mind.

I agree Matt, well said. The folks that designed the Venturing program put a lot thought into it. I'm still impressed by how great Venturing could be. Unfortunately, because of the factors you've mentioned, we rarely see Venturing live up to its potential.

Excellent catch, I missed it. I am deeply committed to the Venturing program, but it's not getting much traction.

I concur with @Eagle94-A1, I've got bad feeling too. I'm glad to see the gains, but they are modest at best. They mostly represent motivated girls, the ones who have been waiting to join the BSA and did so as soon as they could. While there are still more girls that will join and excel, I doubt the additions will offset the other much larger losses the BSA is facing. Factor in other issues: 1. Adult volunteer fatigue/burnout/resignations 2. National's woeful financial status; its commitment to bureaucracy and poor communication; its ham-fisted management style with volunteers (and even council level pros) 3. Units inactive or not rechartering (several to my personal knowledge) 4. Ongoing litigation and insurance crises I think the BSA is an organization at risk. A good example: National's decision to put Philmont in hock. When you resort to taking grandma's wedding ring to the local pawn shop, you're one step from the poor house.

Very true. Of my memories as a patrol member, about half of them involve KP duty, endlessly chipping/scrubbing aluminum fry pans that were encased with impenetrable baked-on food substance.

Lodge is the real deal. Seasoned and ready to go. There are several FB cast iron pages, with dozens of posts each day. Recipes, reseasoning, identification of vintage items, etc.

I was a UC in several different councils. When I introduced myself to units, the two main reactions were disbelief and suspicion. "I've been a SM for X years and you are the first UC I've met." The well functioning units tolerated me. Some struggling units were quite welcoming, happy to have another adult to go on campouts, talk about things, etc. Other struggling units were quite content to flounder and resented any input. Such is life. As far as actual impact as a UC, I still have my doubts. Moderate to minimal, even on a good day. The commissioner concept is great on paper. Very rarely does it work as advertised.