OA and Venturing

[EagleScout441]

I don't think they should let anime, theater, etc., crews into the OA. The majority of crews in my council are outdoor crews who actually wear the uniform and a few of them frequently do joint trips with troops or ships in the area, so from my perspective, Venturing is basically upgraded Boy Scouts.

National says that the program is struggling, but they are the reason that it is struggling. The only people that know what Venturing is are already in scouts and have already found a Boy Scout/Girl Scout troop that they like and don't want to make a transition to Venturing when they are acting as leaders in their troop. And comparing percentages for Boy Scout ranks and Venturing awards isn't really fair, they should be comparing the percentages of Venturing awards with the Boy Scout Hornaday and National Outdoor awards.And as far as optional uniforms goes, I still think that it's pathetic. Someone joins a Venturing Crew and they're not willing to pay $50 for a uniform? Really?

"But why don't we just cut to the chase, sundown Venturing and all the overhead and expense of a struggling program and make Boy Scouts coed? Do that and girls can become Eagles, be elected to OA, go to Jamborees, etc. Problem solved."

Whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.

[EagleScout441]

I would have liked it if you had made your poll a yes or no vote. Yes to include Venturing, no to keep it just Boy Scouts. I voted the option of "I don't care", but I do care. Boy Scouts and Venturing are both BSA programs, and they share many of the same goals.......but they are very different programs. That isn't to say that there are not youth in Venturing who are worthy of being recognized for their selfless service, they just aren't eligible because they aren't Boy Scouts. Venturing doesn't even have to be outdoor oriented. It always dumbfounds me that we have two divergent programs that people keep wanting to bring back together. Venturing is the un-scout program.....and I don't mean that as an offense. Let me explain. There are folks and boys out there that complained about uniforms, ranks, POR's, all that stuffy structure and the exclusion of girls. So what does BSA do? THey develop a program that is coed, uniform optional, advancement optional and a loose structure that can encompass many a program emphasis. And what happens? They want to be Boy Scouts and go to Jamborees, high adventure bases, summer camp, OA, etc. I'm not against the Venturing program, I'm really not. But why don't we just cut to the chase, sundown Venturing and all the overhead and expense of a struggling program and make Boy Scouts coed? Do that and girls can become Eagles, be elected to OA, go to Jamborees, etc. Problem solved.

The purpose of this poll is to find out whether or not Venturers want to be in the OA. Why would a Venturer say that they didn't want Venturing to have OA elections? If they didn't want to be in the OA they simply wouldn't run in the OA election, one or two Venturers saying no to nomination shouldn't stop other Venturers from being elected, hence, they don't care whether or not there are OA elections for Venturing because they don't want to be in it. I know a Boy Scout who declined nomination into the OA, he simply didn't want to be in the OA. Maybe you didn't read my whole post: "If you aren't a Venturer please DO NOT answer in this poll."

[EagleScout441]

I would have liked it if you had made your poll a yes or no vote. Yes to include Venturing, no to keep it just Boy Scouts. I voted the option of "I don't care", but I do care. Boy Scouts and Venturing are both BSA programs, and they share many of the same goals.......but they are very different programs. That isn't to say that there are not youth in Venturing who are worthy of being recognized for their selfless service, they just aren't eligible because they aren't Boy Scouts. Venturing doesn't even have to be outdoor oriented. It always dumbfounds me that we have two divergent programs that people keep wanting to bring back together. Venturing is the un-scout program.....and I don't mean that as an offense. Let me explain. There are folks and boys out there that complained about uniforms, ranks, POR's, all that stuffy structure and the exclusion of girls. So what does BSA do? THey develop a program that is coed, uniform optional, advancement optional and a loose structure that can encompass many a program emphasis. And what happens? They want to be Boy Scouts and go to Jamborees, high adventure bases, summer camp, OA, etc. I'm not against the Venturing program, I'm really not. But why don't we just cut to the chase, sundown Venturing and all the overhead and expense of a struggling program and make Boy Scouts coed? Do that and girls can become Eagles, be elected to OA, go to Jamborees, etc. Problem solved.

While editing my post I accidentally deleted your vote some how. You'll have to vote again.

[qwazse]

I don't think they should let anime, theater, etc., crews into the OA. The majority of crews in my council are outdoor crews who actually wear the uniform and a few of them frequently do joint trips with troops or ships in the area, so from my perspective, Venturing is basically upgraded Boy Scouts.

National says that the program is struggling, but they are the reason that it is struggling. The only people that know what Venturing is are already in scouts and have already found a Boy Scout/Girl Scout troop that they like and don't want to make a transition to Venturing when they are acting as leaders in their troop. And comparing percentages for Boy Scout ranks and Venturing awards isn't really fair, they should be comparing the percentages of Venturing awards with the Boy Scout Hornaday and National Outdoor awards.And as far as optional uniforms goes, I still think that it's pathetic. Someone joins a Venturing Crew and they're not willing to pay $50 for a uniform? Really?

"But why don't we just cut to the chase, sundown Venturing and all the overhead and expense of a struggling program and make Boy Scouts coed? Do that and girls can become Eagles, be elected to OA, go to Jamborees, etc. Problem solved."

Whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.

Lessee ... $50 uniform ... $10 activity shirt and $40 in under armor, or a utility shirt and custom necker (full size, suitable for trading internationally) ... or a down-payment on your chain-mail. (Or matriculation deposit for college.) When it ain't your folk's money or their bills anymore, the equation changes.

 

Wait! Hasn't anyone told you about the Venturing Leadership Awards? That's a fairly elite club. A broader group: Venturing Officers Associations. They are recommended by their advisors and elected by their peers. (Also, VOA's and have "OA" in the acronym. No sash, but epaulets are silver for council officers or gold for area and regional officers.)

[EagleScout441]

I don't think they should let anime, theater, etc., crews into the OA. The majority of crews in my council are outdoor crews who actually wear the uniform and a few of them frequently do joint trips with troops or ships in the area, so from my perspective, Venturing is basically upgraded Boy Scouts.

National says that the program is struggling, but they are the reason that it is struggling. The only people that know what Venturing is are already in scouts and have already found a Boy Scout/Girl Scout troop that they like and don't want to make a transition to Venturing when they are acting as leaders in their troop. And comparing percentages for Boy Scout ranks and Venturing awards isn't really fair, they should be comparing the percentages of Venturing awards with the Boy Scout Hornaday and National Outdoor awards.And as far as optional uniforms goes, I still think that it's pathetic. Someone joins a Venturing Crew and they're not willing to pay $50 for a uniform? Really?

"But why don't we just cut to the chase, sundown Venturing and all the overhead and expense of a struggling program and make Boy Scouts coed? Do that and girls can become Eagles, be elected to OA, go to Jamborees, etc. Problem solved."

Whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.

Isn't being in the VOA more like a leadership position? Like the first step to area, regional, or national positions.

And the Leadership Awards are just awards, not an honor society(or as you call them "a fairly elite club") like the OA or the NESA.

BTW, I'm talking about the Venturing Class A uniform, the shirt by itself without the patches is $40.

[qwazse]

I don't think they should let anime, theater, etc., crews into the OA. The majority of crews in my council are outdoor crews who actually wear the uniform and a few of them frequently do joint trips with troops or ships in the area, so from my perspective, Venturing is basically upgraded Boy Scouts.

National says that the program is struggling, but they are the reason that it is struggling. The only people that know what Venturing is are already in scouts and have already found a Boy Scout/Girl Scout troop that they like and don't want to make a transition to Venturing when they are acting as leaders in their troop. And comparing percentages for Boy Scout ranks and Venturing awards isn't really fair, they should be comparing the percentages of Venturing awards with the Boy Scout Hornaday and National Outdoor awards.And as far as optional uniforms goes, I still think that it's pathetic. Someone joins a Venturing Crew and they're not willing to pay $50 for a uniform? Really?

"But why don't we just cut to the chase, sundown Venturing and all the overhead and expense of a struggling program and make Boy Scouts coed? Do that and girls can become Eagles, be elected to OA, go to Jamborees, etc. Problem solved."

Whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.

Well, I think this is where we do you youth a disservice. We've dissected "honor" from leadership. VOA should not be a mere leadership position. Every advisor should encourage the best members in their crew (even if they aren't officers) to contribute time to the VOA. They should really be an integral part of their council -- advising on everything from infrastructure to service projects, fundraisers and camporees .... Simply put, the best venturers, to be of better use to their crew, need to devote some time to hanging out with the best venturers of other crews and exchanging notes. The ideal VOA president would touch base with the Lodge chief from time to time. IMHO those are the two youth should be the most highly regarded in every council.

[qwazse]

I don't think they should let anime, theater, etc., crews into the OA. The majority of crews in my council are outdoor crews who actually wear the uniform and a few of them frequently do joint trips with troops or ships in the area, so from my perspective, Venturing is basically upgraded Boy Scouts.

National says that the program is struggling, but they are the reason that it is struggling. The only people that know what Venturing is are already in scouts and have already found a Boy Scout/Girl Scout troop that they like and don't want to make a transition to Venturing when they are acting as leaders in their troop. And comparing percentages for Boy Scout ranks and Venturing awards isn't really fair, they should be comparing the percentages of Venturing awards with the Boy Scout Hornaday and National Outdoor awards.And as far as optional uniforms goes, I still think that it's pathetic. Someone joins a Venturing Crew and they're not willing to pay $50 for a uniform? Really?

"But why don't we just cut to the chase, sundown Venturing and all the overhead and expense of a struggling program and make Boy Scouts coed? Do that and girls can become Eagles, be elected to OA, go to Jamborees, etc. Problem solved."

Whoa, whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.

Regarding uniforms, I understand that you are talking about the National field uniform. But, that $40 translates into two mornings with a climbing guide on some very challenging rocks just north of town. For a youth who probably already has a (boy/girl) scout uniform, fireman/EMT gear, their military uni (which is to take precedence at any formal scouting function anyway), and possibly a wife -- and baby on the way: why would I want him put his money in a shirt that he won't be wearing?

[SR540Beaver]

Whoa' date=' whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.[/quote']

 

 

 

 

BSA and GSUSA are two different programs independent of each other. You can't have SUSA organization with boy scouts, girl scouts and coed scouts. Well, you can....but BSA and GSUSA won't allow you to use their names of "boy scouts" and "girl scouts". You'd have to call them something else. And since they aren't part of BSA, OA would not be available to them. As far as why each division doesn't have their own honor society, I'd suggest you do some research on the OA. It was started by a camp director at a single Boy Scout summer camp. The idea spread to other camps. It was run outside the BSA. BSA did not adopt the OA as part of the program until something like the 40's if I recall correctly. OA started in 1915. A less known Bot Scout honor society called Mic-O-Say still exists in some councils, but is not an official part of BSA like OA is. If Venturing wants to start an honor society, a model already exists dating back to 1915. Someone needs to start one, promote it to crews in other councils and try and make it grow. If it is popular enough and grows enough, BSA might adopt it like they did OA. I'll stand on my original post, Boy Scouts and Venturing are two different programs. If Venturing gloms onto Boy Scouts, it does itself a disservice and blurs what it could become. They need to set themselves apart, not emulate and adopt Boy Scout programs. Doing that will make them irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

 

[EagleScout441]

Whoa' date=' whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.[/quote']

 

 

 

 

BSA and GSUSA are two different programs independent of each other. You can't have SUSA organization with boy scouts, girl scouts and coed scouts. Well, you can....but BSA and GSUSA won't allow you to use their names of "boy scouts" and "girl scouts". You'd have to call them something else. And since they aren't part of BSA, OA would not be available to them. As far as why each division doesn't have their own honor society, I'd suggest you do some research on the OA. It was started by a camp director at a single Boy Scout summer camp. The idea spread to other camps. It was run outside the BSA. BSA did not adopt the OA as part of the program until something like the 40's if I recall correctly. OA started in 1915. A less known Bot Scout honor society called Mic-O-Say still exists in some councils, but is not an official part of BSA like OA is. If Venturing wants to start an honor society, a model already exists dating back to 1915. Someone needs to start one, promote it to crews in other councils and try and make it grow. If it is popular enough and grows enough, BSA might adopt it like they did OA. I'll stand on my original post, Boy Scouts and Venturing are two different programs. If Venturing gloms onto Boy Scouts, it does itself a disservice and blurs what it could become. They need to set themselves apart, not emulate and adopt Boy Scout programs. Doing that will make them irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

GSUSA is the female scouting organization of the USA, it is basically the same as the Boy Scouts other than the fact that it is all female. I have also heard of GSUSA troops going on trips/outing with BSA troops.

[EagleScout441]

Whoa' date=' whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.[/quote']

 

 

 

 

BSA and GSUSA are two different programs independent of each other. You can't have SUSA organization with boy scouts, girl scouts and coed scouts. Well, you can....but BSA and GSUSA won't allow you to use their names of "boy scouts" and "girl scouts". You'd have to call them something else. And since they aren't part of BSA, OA would not be available to them. As far as why each division doesn't have their own honor society, I'd suggest you do some research on the OA. It was started by a camp director at a single Boy Scout summer camp. The idea spread to other camps. It was run outside the BSA. BSA did not adopt the OA as part of the program until something like the 40's if I recall correctly. OA started in 1915. A less known Bot Scout honor society called Mic-O-Say still exists in some councils, but is not an official part of BSA like OA is. If Venturing wants to start an honor society, a model already exists dating back to 1915. Someone needs to start one, promote it to crews in other councils and try and make it grow. If it is popular enough and grows enough, BSA might adopt it like they did OA. I'll stand on my original post, Boy Scouts and Venturing are two different programs. If Venturing gloms onto Boy Scouts, it does itself a disservice and blurs what it could become. They need to set themselves apart, not emulate and adopt Boy Scout programs. Doing that will make them irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

And as far as SUSA goes, I'm talking about joining the BSA and the GSUSA organizations together.

"They need to set themselves apart, not emulate and adopt Boy Scout programs. Doing that will make them irrelevant."

Well, since I know one of the Area Presidents, maybe I should attempt to create an honor society for Venturing.

[Eagle92]

Actually the Corps of Discovery is an unofficial Venturing Honor Society that is starting to takeoff. http://www.venturingcorps.com/

 

Sea Scouts in SR7 have created the Order of the Golden Dragons. http://sasserrc.tripod.com/cardinalwardroom/id37.htm

[BadenP]

If OA is a Boy Scout program, why would Venturing even be involved? Same for the leadership of the Cub Scout program. Do they wear the lodge flap on their DL uniform?

I agree the OA is and should remain a Boy Scout program only. None of our crew is even remotely interested in getting involved with the OA.

[qwazse]

Actually the Corps of Discovery is an unofficial Venturing Honor Society that is starting to takeoff. http://www.venturingcorps.com/

 

Sea Scouts in SR7 have created the Order of the Golden Dragons. http://sasserrc.tripod.com/cardinalwardroom/id37.htm

I forgot about CoD! Thanks for the reminder.

As always with things in the beginning, it is a little ambiguous about how this distinguishes a youth who is part of CoD from one who puts her heart and soul into her VOA and never bothers with CoD.

[qwazse]

Whoa' date=' whoa, whoa, slow down. Here is what I think about it: The co-ed programs shouldn't be under the title of the BSA, just like the Girl Scouts have their own program, co-ed groups should do the same. The other option is to have SUSA, Scouts of the United States of America, and have three divisions: Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and Scouts(co-ed). The OA could then either be an honor society for all scouts, or stay a Boy Scout program. But if it stays a Boy Scout/Varsity Scout only program, why doesn't each division of Scouting get it's own honor society? The Girl Scouts don't have one and the only Venturers that are part of the OA are former Boy Scouts.[/quote']

 

 

 

 

BSA and GSUSA are two different programs independent of each other. You can't have SUSA organization with boy scouts, girl scouts and coed scouts. Well, you can....but BSA and GSUSA won't allow you to use their names of "boy scouts" and "girl scouts". You'd have to call them something else. And since they aren't part of BSA, OA would not be available to them. As far as why each division doesn't have their own honor society, I'd suggest you do some research on the OA. It was started by a camp director at a single Boy Scout summer camp. The idea spread to other camps. It was run outside the BSA. BSA did not adopt the OA as part of the program until something like the 40's if I recall correctly. OA started in 1915. A less known Bot Scout honor society called Mic-O-Say still exists in some councils, but is not an official part of BSA like OA is. If Venturing wants to start an honor society, a model already exists dating back to 1915. Someone needs to start one, promote it to crews in other councils and try and make it grow. If it is popular enough and grows enough, BSA might adopt it like they did OA. I'll stand on my original post, Boy Scouts and Venturing are two different programs. If Venturing gloms onto Boy Scouts, it does itself a disservice and blurs what it could become. They need to set themselves apart, not emulate and adopt Boy Scout programs. Doing that will make them irrelevant.

 

 

 

 

Nobody ever taught you about sacred cows, did they?

 

Yes, some troops get together and do these kinds of things. Love it when they do, but the leaders get lots of flack if they even suggest replicating it on a grander level.

 

GS love their troops (by-and-large age based patrols). BS love bringing every boy under one roof. They seem very far away from a unified organization.

[EagleScout441]

Actually the Corps of Discovery is an unofficial Venturing Honor Society that is starting to takeoff. http://www.venturingcorps.com/

 

Sea Scouts in SR7 have created the Order of the Golden Dragons. http://sasserrc.tripod.com/cardinalwardroom/id37.htm

Well, what do ya know! I take it all back, Venturers don't need the OA when they have this. Thanks E92 for posting this.