The Softening of Scouting

[RangerT]

While I might agree that the current BSA program might be softer than the program of old I do not feel its realistic to put all the blame on National. When most of us were kids we used to love going on hikes and camp out, go exploring, etc. This is not true of most kids today and the reasons why are diverse. First of all in most of the country kids don't play outdoors or go off exploring very much anymore for parental fear of the child being kidnapped or worse. Our kids of today grow up in an environment of fear, this is a societal problem that has been erroding our way of life for at least two decades now, and it seems to be getting worse.

 

Secondly, just because the BSA program has changed emphasis doesn't mean the program in your troop has to do the same. In my crew years ago the teens really didn't want to go camping, or hiking, why, because they had never been shown those type of skills growing up, it was a fear factor. As an avid outdoorsman myself I showed them just how easy it was to survive in the wild, with the proper skills and training, starting out small and building on those skills the fear gradually left them and now most of them look forward to going into the outdoors. I make sure that I challenge them but never overwhelm them. With these positive experiences their confidence has greatly improved, even their parents are amazed.

 

So if scouting has gotten softer its because the leaders have gotten softer and have lost the true vision of scouting, not only developing good and helpful citizens but teaching them the skills to take care of themselves and others in the wild, appreciating the beauty of nature, and learning to be good stewards of our natural resources in order to protect them for future generations.

[Eamonn]

Not sure why?

But as I read over this thread, I couldn't help but think of the:

"When I was a boy, we hiked ten miles to and from school every day, through the snow, uphill -Both ways.

OK, so I was never a youth member of the BSA.

Still it seems to me that each generation tells the next that things were so much harder, better, worse.. In the Good Old Days.

Old Fred Jenkins would tell me how in the 1930's, when he was a Scout they would load up the trek-cart on a Saturday afternoon and push it fully loaded to camp for a weekend, after working till noon on Saturday.

No light weight camping equipment back in them days.

While we spend a lot of time talking about "Youth Led" programs. I can't help but notice that if the adult leaders have a particular interest or are skilled in some area that area of interest seems to rub off on the entire unit. (I hate the cold, so I'm not going to offer my services to go on a week long hike in the winter. The Scouts are welcome to do what they want, but my lack of interest does kinda put the kibosh on the idea.)

With this in mind if we really think that the program offered is not challenging enough or doesn't provide enough adventure?

Who is to blame?

Ea.

[theysawyoucomin']

E.,

I see your point. But, on the contray where I live cold weather is a part of life. Yet for the last 4 years our unit has not sent a team to the Klondike derby. Some of the kids go out so little that they don't even own a pair of winter boots. They stand in a shoveled driveway in sneakers waiting for the school bus to come. I've been above the Arctic Circle twice and love the cold but we can't do anymore than cabin camping because kids don't own the proper gear, yet they have the latest edition of electronic game.

 

I like shooting, so I know folks at a local shooting club that does metalic silhouette. About half the unit showed up for the fun shoot. The kids had fun, but what about the other half.

 

Eammon,

I reading you posts here if the Scouts really wanted to do a winter activity that you would facilitate it some how. You are a giver. You would either gut it out or find a resource to help the boys.

 

 

In genereal I find it sickening that when called on the phone, the average 14 year old can recite from memory how to get into the evil palace on their favorite video game yet they cannot orient a map even though they are Star Scouts. And some of them have never had the necessity to orient the map because they seldom get more rugged than a camporee.

[Kudu]

Eamonn writes:

 

"Still it seems to me that each generation tells the next that things were so much harder, better, worse.. In the Good Old Days."

 

It is easy enough to compare previous advancement standards to the sissy stuff that remains. For instance BSA First Class Requirement 5 was:

 

"Make a round trip alone (or with another Scout) to a point at least seven miles away (14 miles in all), going on foot, or rowing a boat, and write a satisfactory account of the trip and things observed."

 

"No light weight camping equipment back in them days."

 

Exactly right, the outdoor standards Baden-Powell devised to reverse the softening of English culture are actually now much easier to meet.

 

"While we spend a lot of time talking about "Youth Led" programs. I can't help but notice that if the adult leaders have a particular interest or are skilled in some area that area of interest seems to rub off on the entire unit. (I hate the cold, so I'm not going to offer my services to go on a week long hike in the winter. The Scouts are welcome to do what they want, but my lack of interest does kinda put the kibosh on the idea.)"

 

Exactly right again. The Camping Merit Badge requirement to camp one night 1.5 miles from the nearest parking lot was eliminated because adults do not want to tag along. It is a lot easier to sit around and talk about "making moral and ethical choices." In the end "Eagle Scout" still looks the same on your son's resume.

 

"With this in mind if we really think that the program offered is not challenging enough or doesn't provide enough adventure? Who is to blame?"

 

Not "who" but "what," Eamonn! The problem is that unlike the UK, we only have one Scouting association in the United States. So there is no way to "shop around," to compare the "ethical choices" of a BSA Eagle Scout who earned Camping Merit Badge near a parking lot, with the "ethical choices" of a First Class Scout in a competing Scouting association that required him to test his skills on the traditional First Class Journey.

 

Kudu

 

[Gonzo1]

Kudu,

I usually agree with your posts. However, there is some competition. There is Royal Rangers, Royal Ammbassadors, YMCA, several denomination related groups, U.S. Naval Sea Cadet Corps, Young Marines and so on.

 

I'm sure some of these groupd are good, I've worked with the Sea Cadets for 2 years, I enjoyed it. However, in my opinion, there is no finer organization for young men and boys.

 

Besides, if you ask the Royal Rangers and Royal Ambassadors, they'll say "it's just like the Boy Scouts" (laugh)

(This message has been edited by Gonzo1)

[SSScout]

Yes, Just a little interest here...

 

Okay, so some of us us oldsters think some of the Program has been eeeeased up abit, and some of us think it's just a sign of the times, and some of us see the PROGRAM being adapted to attract "todays boy" (marketing).

 

Still, there ain't no more Blacksmithing MB, and some might mourn the loss of the Rabbit Raising MB.

 

The 2x4 that my father built with measured 1-7/8 x 3-7/8. The "2x4" you buy at H-D today will measure 1-3/4 x 3-1/2. Is there a paralell? Or am I just being meloncholy, regretting the loss of my halcyon youth?

 

At the past CSDC, my buddy the DC, observed to me, and we discussed how uncoordinated and unfit some of our Cubs seemed to be: left vs right, following directions difficult, hard to keep up with the group, soccer field slow, etc. compared with what we remembered and from talking to 'older' school teachers. Not statistics, just anecdotal...

 

And Scouting goes on.

[Eamonn]

Running at the same time as this thread is a thread that asks about what knot tying as a Tenderfoot requirement as to do with the aims of Scouting.

Give me 20 lashes with a wet noodle, but I have to plead guilty to at times not thinking about the Aims or that good stuff.

A lot of the time, in fact most of the time; we do what we do for the fun of doing it.

I want the Scouts to have fun, I want them to try new things and challenge themselves. (Yes I know that I have used the "I word" too much!!)

Is there a better or bigger payday than having a Scout give you a smile and say "Boy, we made it! It was hard, but we managed?

For the record -Sea Scouts still learn semaphore!

Our Scouts enjoy it!!

I'm not very good at drill, so I asked one of the Dads who is an ex-US Marine to do that with the Ship. He does a great job and manages to hold the interest of the entire Ship every-time he does it.

Maybe it's because our Sea Scouts are a little older? But there doesn't seem to be the need for instant gratification, when it comes to getting requirements signed off.

They want to be good at what they do, I want to be sure that they have the skills that keep them safe, so the standards are high.

Of course some of that is all down to me.

Some of them are more lightly to show up for All Night Bowling than they are to turn up to work on the boats! They are kids.

Some of them see what we do as being very important and a big part of who they are, while others see it just as something to do if and when they can find the time or feel like it.

Of course they have all the "Toys" that kids have today. They can send text messages at the speed of light in a language known only to people under the age of 25! They can carry on a conversation about the latest new video game for hours and hours.

Still given the right training and a little shove (Also known as a friendly kick in the pants!!) They will rise to meet any challenge, they will go out of their way to do their best to not only please me, but prove to themselves that they can.

Our role is to help them challenge themselves, provide the training and the shove.

I used to buy into the idea that our Scouts weren't as "Scouty" as we were. But I don't any more. I think many of the leaders are just not doing what they should be doing.

I'm not sure if the leaders don't have the skills? Or they feel they need to fast track the Scouts for some reason?

Advancement is only a method of Scouting. Maybe if we could find a way of not making it the be all and end all of everything that we do and didn't make such a big deal or allow it to be such a big deal? We could really bring the vision statement to have real meaning.

Ea.

[Beavah]

I used to buy into the idea that our Scouts weren't as "Scouty" as we were. But I don't any more. I think many of the leaders are just not doing what they should be doing. I'm not sure if the leaders don't have the skills?

 

Interestin' point, Eamonn.

 

It does seem to me that Scoutmasters and other adult leaders have gotten older and rounder over the years. Some of that may be that people are gettin' married and having kids later in life. Makes a big difference if we're 35 and 160 instead of 45 and 200 how we view a strenuous outing. And as you say, in da long run the kids are goin' to follow the lead/encouragement of the adults in terms of the program.

 

Beavah

 

[Lisabob]

Seems to me that part of the issue is that many of these so-called "scout skills" used to be daily "life skills" for a good many people, and they no longer are. I can't recall ever needing to tie a double half hitch in my daily life - at least, not my home life or work life. My "recreational life" is another issue, but that's purely voluntary, and that's my point. I'm not knocking these skills and before anyone starts publishing a list of all the conceivable situations where using that double half hitch might be important, back off a little and think about it - chances are your neighbors and non-scouting friends & family can't tie it either, and they've all survived so far.

 

Same could be said of fire building & cooking (hey, just order a pizza if you can't cook), knife safety (what do you really even use a knife for, if you live indoors and never cook, let alone an axe or saw), hiking, wilderness survival, etc..

 

Once upon a time everyone knew how to do these because everyone needed to use these skills. Not so any more. And for most adults who were not boy scouts themselves, these are skills that must be learned as adults in order to become good scout leaders. So in some regards, it does not surprise me if, as Beavah says, we are seeing mostly older folks as leaders. They're the ones with the skills.

 

Just as an aside - I'm in my 30s and I'm the youngest leader in my son's troop by at least 10 years. There IS a generational gap there, and it is reflected (among other things) in the skill sets we have. We grew up in different times, with different experiences. Most of them actually used many of these "scout skills" working on the family farm or elsewhere as kids. And those who didn't, have used the 10+ years they have on me to learn and practice those skills. So yeah, I'd rather see them as SM than me because they have the scout skills that I don't. Maybe in 10+ years I'll be there too.

 

 

[mtm25653]

SSScout said:

Still, there ain't no more Blacksmithing MB, and some might mourn the loss of the Rabbit Raising MB.

 

There is a Blacksmithing badge, sort of - it is one of the options for metalworking - I can't speak to the differences in requirements to the old badge, but I can see the logic of combining similar, rarely earned badges into one book. I treasure the twisted hook my son made for me. (Can't help you with Rabbit Raising, maybe you could lobby to get it added to Animal Science - there is a avian option now.)

[Eagledad]

>>There IS a generational gap there, and it is reflected (among other things) in the skill sets we have.

[tdfoxsr736]

Is it me, or have you noticed that Leave No Trace is getting more extreme? I have been to many Leave-No-Trace lectures, and talked to many others who have also. I seems to me that everytime I talk to someone about LNT, it just gets more and more extreme. Some of my boys attended a LNT session at summer camp in Wisconsin last week, and the scout staffer teaching the class suggested that the boys take a PVC pipe with a sealable cap hiking with them. It's called a poop tube, and you guessed it the purpose of this was to contain your own excrement to pack it out rather than bury it in the woods.

 

Are we as Scouts and Scouters forsaking the art of woodcraft for LNT? Can we truly go into the wilderness and leave no trace? LNT assumes that man is not a part of his environment; that he is an outsider. We are just as much a part of our environment as the animals and plants. I agree with the conservation principles of LNT, but the application in some instances is in my opinion is going too extremes. LNT disourages the use of campfires in favor of fuel burning stoves. This seems to be more harmful to the environment when you consider the process of refining crude oil into fuel, or the extraction of natural gas. LNT encourages others to disperse in pristine areas to avoid making trails. I assure you there will be less damage if you have one trail rather than multiple trails. Wildlife establish and reuse their own trails. It takes very little time for grass to grow over a trail. Take a look at you own yard. If you fail to edge along the concrete sidewalks they will soon be covered over.

 

I feel that woodcraft skills which were once the crowning jewel of Scouting have been pushed to the back burner. They are taught as "Survival Skills" meaning they are only to be used in emergency situations.

 

When we learn to live off of the land, we better appreciate our environment... how to master fire, how food chains work, how our ancestors lived.

 

Again, I agree with the princples of LNT, but we must not lose sight of the fact that we too are of this planet, and we must not lose the skills that allow us to become one with nature. If you truly want to leave no trace, then stay home. As for me and mine, we'll see you in the woods communing with nature and practicing conservation as we should.

 

Check out these links:

http://lnt.org/

http://www.foresthistory.org/Publications/EH/July2002/Turner.pdf

http://www.ncstaff.net/oed/TheImportanceOfTraditionalWoodcraftSkillsPage.htm

 

[Gunny2862]

My understanding of the "poop tube" is that it is especially for use at altitude where the required microbial action isn't available to break down the organic waste in a suitable period of time - especially in areas that see frequent usage. And in that context I buy in to the idea. It's not for every single camp out everywhere.

 

I do agree that it seems like some of the LNT ideas are presented from an extremist point of view. But, we have a local nature trail that is just for "follow the trail" nature walks where some folks won't go into the woods with out a defined path. Some of the trails which were originally a single foot track, lets call it 18 inches wide(or less) have grown to over 5 feet wide in just a very few years because some people (who won't go into the woods w/o a trail)won't stay on the trail. We still use it because it has an amazing variety of flora and fauna available in an extremely compact area.

[GernBlansten]

LNT making scouting soft?

Can't make the connection myself. I think LNT aligns perfectly with scouting, past and present.

Poop tubes are necessary in certain situations. Narrow canyons where you can't dig a cat hole more than 200ft from water. Alpine areas where permafrost wouldn't allow decomposition. If you think that's extreme, how would you feel drinking from a stream where a troop just did a group poop 50 ft away?

Really, I can't think of one thing LNT preaches that softens scouting.

[troutmaster]

Very interesting discussion. I became steadily active as an adult in 1976, and remember my surprise at some of the changes that were in place at the time (see the ugly green handbook series of the period; the inner city idea). In 1977 I went to a commissioner training course at Philmont and could not help but wonder about these changes even more as "old timers" talked about the "taking the outing out of scouting", and so on. This period appears to be when the "gap" appeared, as many of the "old timers" threw their hands up and left in frustration; and by the time National saw the light and began reinstating things, they were either not interested, or simply too old to carry on. We were also suffering what I call the Viet Nam Era backlash, the rebellion of younger people against anything remotely perceived as military or regimented. Those of us who had just returned, and carried on, have seen the slow evolution back to many of the older ideas; but, as noted, many of the children we serve today have been frightened to death of anything remotely dangerous, and over protected. (See the great article about the Wimp Factor" on this board).

 

On the other hand, while the lower ranks are definitely less challenging, especially without time frames between, and boy run boards of review, the higher ranks are in truth more difficult when the requirements are followed as written. Unless you were a scout after the mid 60's, Star, Life, and Eagle were mostly just passing merit badges, along with truly demonstrating leadership and good citizenship. Today, the Project adds a greater challenge to attaining Eagle that was not encountered by us. Again, if planned and performed as intended, this element is far and away the greatest growth experience the scout will have most likely. His ability to meet this challenge though is still built on the other elements, especially learning to be more self sufficient in the outdoors or other more difficult environments. Having been a regular Eagle board member for a couple of years now, I am encouraged by most of the applicants, especially the ones over 16 who have pretty much decided this is important afterall. Granted, some have barely met the requirements; but a substantial amount are exceptional and give me hope for our country and its future.

 

Some of the merit badge changes really make good sense for the intent of the program. The old standbys are mostly still there, even though Camping was MIA for a while. And the options for Swimming and Lifesaving are not gimme's either. All the Citizenship badges, including Family Life are important in today's world; Environmental Science simply evolves from Bird Study, then Nature; Communications and especially Personnel Management are key life skills.

 

But I also see more and more "dumbing down" of the intent of the requirements. Far too many leaders seem to not understand why actually doing the requirement as written is important, just do not want to ruffle feathers. The idea that Johnny Scout will have his feelings hurt if he is not able to immediately pass something is starting to pervade too often; and this is abetted by the over protective and indulgent parents. While I understand the reasoning behind the BOR not being a retest, the idea that spot checking is not allowed is absurd. I, for one, would welcome the return of the PLC/TLC BOR for T-1st, with one or two adult supervisors on hand to assure it did not get out of line. The boys doing the review strengthen their leadership skills, and the scout knows he is being judged by his peers and is more likely to want to shine, knowing that he is not going to put too much over on them.

 

Ultimately, we, as leaders, need to try to continue to focus on the strengths of the program and find ways to keep it fun. My troop will never be noted as an "Eagle Mill", as we have only had 45 in going on 86 years; but I can say that the ones we have are real. There is a certain amount of irony that many who were run through the "mills" drop out soon after, and are far less likely to return as adults. And the scouts can generally tell you who is a real Eagle, and who is not.

 

Paraphrasing BP again; "Scouting is a game that develops boys into men, without them really knowing it".