Reading this today was a bit of a surprise! Some of the adventures going away were on our list of favorites. I know speculation doesn’t do much, but I am wondering if anyone has a sense if these will be replaced or if they are just cutting back on the number of electives offered in general? Some of these are attached as options with the Cub Nova’s and some other awards as well, so it will be interesting to see how it adapts.
I was surprised by Fix It and Robotics. I guess only seeing the Adventures in their way out, and no replacements, makes this half of a message.
I was surprised by Moviemaking, especially since there’s a merit badge for it.
What didn’t surprise me was staff misspelled Moviemaking.
Hopefully. If it is “the whole message”, then it reads like downsizing the program, with no explicit explanation as to why. The argument of “earned by less than 3% of youth” for the lowest-utilized adventure would raise some eyebrows if used as a metric for Scouts BSA. In 2015, I think the metric was ~ 2% of all (then past and present) Boy Scouts had ever earned Eagle. As of 2019, I think it was up to 6% of current scouts. I have yet to hear that the low percentage of completion justifies eliminating Eagle Scout, and hope I never do.
I think I personally would feel more settled if it either stated that they were reducing the number of electives so that Scouts have more of an opportunity to complete them all as well as working toward many of the awards, ex. Novas. OR If they were to state something along the lines of “new adventures coming soon”. Being in limbo trying to guess the future of the program stresses me out. But I am a planner. As a leader, I try to plan out not just my year but subsequent ranks to at least some degree so I know what I need to accomplish. Not everyone has my anxiety for planning. LOL I know that! But still.
Like him or not Rush Limbaugh had a saying and I believe it applies here.
Follow the money.
@CharleyHamilton - If we had always been going by the percentage of youth participants earning an award, Bugling merit badge would have been gone decades ago.
How about the former Hornaday Silver Medal? They made the BSA Distinguished COnservation Service Award easier.
Sea Scout Quartermaster?
I think this is really about the BSA making itself leaner and meaner when it emerges from Bankruptcy. If you have a fixed amount of resources to support Cub Scout adventures, you have achoice between doing an okay job supporting about 105 adventures or a great job supporting about 85 of them. I can’t fault them for choosing the latter.
I am surprised by some on the list, because they’ve been popular in my pack:
- More than half the Tigers in our pack the past three program years have earned Earning Your Stripes
- Our pre-pandemic era fall rcruiting was always staggered, since we draw Scouts from so many different schools, so our Wolf den leader chose Collections and Hobbies to start the 2019-2020 program year, rather than a required adventure, so the late comers would not have to catch up. It was well received.
- Grow Something is a pretty big commitment for a Wolf, but we’ve had Scouts earn it just because they wanted the World Conservation Award better known as the Panda Patch.
- Hometown Heroes has inspired our calendar in the past, encouraging us to work in a visit to either a firehouse or a police precinct.
- Seven of the eight Bears (who rechartered at least once) we’ve had in the two most recent program years have earned the Robotics adventure. The Bear den leader for 2019-2020 was an engineer by trade and used this adventure to launch his career as a Cub Scout volunteer. The one who doesn’t have the adventure completed needs only one more requirement, and she will complete a Nova award with it, after she explains to the Nova counselor how she used STEM to earn the adventure.
If I were to guess the 20 least popular elective adventures, none of the ones I listed above would be included in my guess.
I can see some of those arguments, @PeterHopkins, and I certainly don’t fault you for pointing them out. I guess, though, I keep looking at it from the perspective that we were already (pre-COVID, pre-bankruptcy) losing Cub Scouts at a significant rate. We are always hearing about how important recruiting, retaining, and bridging Cubs is to growing and maintaining the Scouts BSA program, putting aside the value of Cub Scouting as a program in and of itself. It seems like eliminating offerings reduces the draw to youth who are either already in the program (retention) or who are potential scouts (recruitment). It’s not clear to me that reducing the number of adventures by a bit under 20% changes the quality of support for the remaining adventures. I tend to agree with the comments that the driver is likely money, which is not really the same thing as “support”.
BSA is working on the “cuts” side, but it’s not clear to me that the metric chosen (least commonly completed) for selecting which adventures to eliminate is necessarily reflective of the popularity of the adventure (e.g. least commonly started) which is the information needed to figure out whether or not it’s a draw to the program. Like for your unit, many of these have historically been pretty popular with the cubs in our feeder pack. It appears that, in the interests of using the “easiest to measure” value, measuring the “right value” (i.e. interest) was potentially missed. Not that I’m sure how to measure interest directly, unless they sent out a ranked-choice survey to Cub Scout families within the program.
The title of the press release “Keeping the Cub Scout Adventure Program Relevant for Today’s Families” comes across as pretty tone-deaf to folks for whom any of these skill sets is “relevant” (e.g. Fix It or Project Family). I think that’s particularly true in the face of some of the preview adventures (Modular Design and Yo-Yo) that have been floated recently. I guess the tone of the release bugged me almost more than the content in some ways. “We’re making cuts to maintain financial viability” seems like a more honest description of cuts made for funding reasons than “keeping the program relevant”. I suppose this is just one of those oxen whose goring was mentioned in the Churchill group discussions, and the PR folks are trying to put lipstick on the proverbial pig.
The title bugged me too. “Keeping it Relevant” to me would mean adding in new adventures that are more modern. Something about exploring different cultures. Or learning more about what local government does. Those feel like they could be more currently relevant topics. But the preview adventures were some of the least liked adventures we’ve done. Even with new requirements for each rank, yo-yo and snap ships don’t particularly feel more relevant to me than what we’re losing. “Streamlining it” would have even made a bit more sense. I don’t know. It just feels a bit strange.
@CharleyHamilton - I do agree with much of what you’re saying, However, support costs money, and, therefore, it equals money. How many jobs can they cut, if they no longer need to support these adventures.
My comment was based on what I see as the practical reality, As a Cub Scout volunteer, I am sad to see all of these go, because they are opporunities future Scouts will no longer have.
Perhaps part of the reason we are seeing STEM adventures cut is the existence of the Nova program. I am active as a Nova counselor and a Supernova mentor. Perhaps they believe that as long as they have that, they will quench the thirsts of kids interested in STEM.
We survived the disappearance of about 36 academics and sports belt loops. We can get past this. There’s also nothing stopping a den leader from executing some of the meeting plans associated with these adventures. Kids just want to have fun. It is fine for them to sometimes not get a loop or a patch.
Because I sometimes get myself wrapped up in strange things, I made a list of every Boy Scout/Scouts BSA merit badge that has ever existed. When Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is released, it will be the 199th (by my unofficial count) merit badge to have existed and the 138th currently available. That means 61 merit badges have disappeared over the years.
We started with 14 badges of merit in 1910. One (Master-at-Arms) was eliminated in 1911. The other 13 all had minor name changes. They generally changed from personal identification to skill identification. For instance, Cyclis became Cycling, and Seaman became Seamanship.
There were 44 new badges added in 1911, to bring the total to 57. In 1914, Invention was dropped, and Physical Development was added. I think fewer than five Scouts earned Invention. You had to actually secure a patent for your invention to earn the badge.
Safety First (now Safety) was the 60th merit badge create din 1916, and brought the total available to 58. Wireless (now Radio) was added in 1919. Botany (eliminated in 1996) and Hiking were added in 1921. It’s had to believe we went 11 years before we got Hiking merit badge.
Foundry Practice (eliminated in 1952) and Insect Life (now Insect Study) were added in 1923. Reptiles (now Reptile and Amphibian Study) was added in 1926. That was the 66th badge created, and there were 64 total available.
In 1927, Craftsmanship was eliminated and split into eight different badges: Basketry, Bookbinding (merged with Printing/Communications in 1987, to form Graphic Arts), Cement Work (dropped in 1952), Leathercraft (dropped in 1952 - different from Leatherwork, alongside which it coexisted), Metalwork, Pottery, Wood Carving and Woodwork. Also added in 1927, were Canoeing, Journalism, Salemanship, Textiles and Weather. That brough the total number of badges available to 76 of the 79 that had been created. To be fair, Craftsmanship shouldn’t be counted as a drop, because turning it into eight badges created more program opportunities, not less.
The following year, there were 12 new badges added, and they reflected Scouting’s reach into rural communities:
- Animal Industry (merged with Dairying, Poultry Keeping, Beef Production, Hog Production and Sheep Farming in 1975, to create Animal Science)
- Beef Production
- Corn Farming (merged with Cotton Farming, Forage Crops, Small Grains and Fruit and Nut Growing to create Plant Science in 1975)
- Farm Home and Its Planning (merged with Farm Layout and Building Arrangements in 1960, to create Farm Arrangement)
- Farm Layout and Building Arrangements
- Farm Mechanics
- Farm Records and Bookkeeping (merged with Farm Arrangements in 1980, to create Farm and Ranch Management, which was replaced by Agribusiness in 1987, and then dropped in 1996)
- Fruit Culture (merged with Nut Culture in 1954, to create Fruit and Nut Growing)
- Hog and Pork Production
- Nut Culture
- Sheep Farming
- Soil Management (now Soil and Water Conservation)
So, of the 12 new badges added in 1928, only four remain avaialble in any form today. Those 12 brought the total available to 88 of 91 (90) total badges.
Reading was added in 1929. In 1930, the added Landscape Gardening (now Landscape Architecture), Wood Turning (dropped in 1952) and Zoology (dropped in 1972). That made 92 out of 95 (94) badges.
In 1931, Citrus Fruit Culture (dropped in 1952), Cotton Farming (see above) Indian Lore and Stamp Collecting were introduced. Dramatics (now Theater) and Pblic Speaking arrived in 1932. Mechanical Drawing (now Drafting), Pigeon Raising (eliminated in 1980) amd Rowing were added in 1933. For the first time there were more than 100 merit badges available. There were 101 out of 104 (103).
Five new badges were added in 1938:
- Coin Collecting
- Dog Care
- Grasses, Legumes, and Forage Crops
In 1942, Aviation was split into four new merit badges to support the Air Scout program:
- Airplane Design
- Airplane Structure
Like Craftsmanship, this isn’t really an elimination of a program offering. So, we had 109 availabe merit badges out of 113 (111) created. More than 30 years into the Boy Scout program and only two merit badges had been created and completely eliminated.
Two new badges - Rabbit Raising (dropped in 1993) and Small Grains and Cereal Foods - were added in 1943. That brought us to 111 available badges out of 115 (113).
Significant changes happened between 1951 and 1954, and the end result was that the number of available merit badges dropped form 111 to 100, even though new badges were added.
- Citizenship (Civics) was expanded to three new merit badges: Citizenship in the Nation, Citizenship in the Community and Citizenship in the Home (eliminated in 1972). +2
- Personal Health and Physical Development were merged to created Personal Fitness. -1
- Aerodynamics, Aeronautics, Airplane Design and Airplane Structure were merged, restoring Aviation. -3
- Fruit Culture and Nut Culture were merged to create Fruit and Nut Growing. -1
- Nature, Railroading, Wildlife Management (now Fish and Wildlife Management) and World Brotherhood (now Citizenship in the World) were all added as new badges. +4
- Stalking, Blacksmithing, Carpentry, Conservation, Interpreting, Pathfinding, Taxidermy, Foundry Practice, Cement Work, Leathercraft, Wood Turning and Citrus Fruit Culture were all dropped. -12
Dropping 12 badges must have been a shock to some. By the end of 1954, 124 badge had been created. Since Aviation was restored, only Citizenship (Civics) and Craftsmanship had been eliminated to create additional badges. So we had 100 badges available out of 124 (122) created, meaning that 22 badges that formerly existed were gone, although many of those were merged,
Pets was added in 1958. Farm Home and Its Planning and Farm Layout and Building Arrangements were merged in 1960, to create Farm Arrangement, bringing us back to 100 available out of now 126 (124) created.
Motorboating was added in 1961. Personal Finances (now Personal Management) was added in 1962. Atomic Energy (now Nuclear Science), Electronics and Model Design and Building were added in 1963. Oceanography was added in 1964. Communications, Metallurgy (dropped in 1996, as Metals Engineering) and Space Exploration were added in 1965. Conservation of Natural Resources (now Environmental Science) was added in 1966. Computers and Engineering were added in 1967. Waterskiing (now Water Sports) was added in 1969.
So, between 1961 and 1969, 12 badges were added and none were dropped or merged. There were 113 badges available at the end of 1969, out of 139 (137).
In 1972, Emergency Preparedness, Genealogy, General Science (dropped in 1996), Mammals (now Mammal Study). Pulp and Paper and Sports were added. Zoology and Citizenship in the Home were dropped. That made 117 badges available out of 145 (143).
In 1973, Orienteering, Skating, Truck Transportation and Wilderness Survival were added. Law followed in 1974. That gave us 122 out of 150 (148) badges.
The great agricultural purge took place in 1975:
- Dairying and Poultry Keeping (two badges created in 1911), Animal Industry, Beef Production, Hog Production and Sheep Farming were merged to create Animal Science. -5
- Corn Farming, Cotton Farming, Forage Crops, Small Grains and Fruit and Nut Growing were merged to create Plant Science. -4
- American Heritage, Consumer Buying (dropped in 1996) and Dentistry were added. +3
- Agriculture (created in 1911) was dropped. -1
That thinned the herd to 115 out of 154 (152) badges.
Energy and Golf were added in 1976. Food Systems (dropped in 1987) was added in 1978. American Cultures was added in 1979. We closed the 1970s with 119 out of 158 (156) badges available.
In 1980, Farm Recods and Farm Arrangements were merged to create Farm and Ranch Management. Handicapped Awareness (now Disabilities Awareness) was added. Pigeon Raising was dropped. Backpacking was added in 1982. That put us at 119 out of 161 (159) badges available.
There were several changes made in 1987:
- Rifle and Shotgun Shooting was split into Rifle Shooting and Shotgun Shooting. +1
- Printing/Communications and Bookbinding were merged to create Graphic Arts. -1
- Farm and Ranch Management was dropped and replaced by Agribusiness, considered a new badge (Scouts could earn both). 0
- Food Systems was dropped. -1
- American Labor and Whitewater were added. +1
The split of Rifle and Shotgun Shooting did not cancel any content. Agribusiness is really a reqorking of Farm and Ranch Management, so it should not be considered as cancellation of any program. So, there were 120 badges out of 167 (163) available.
Cinematography was added in 1990. Collections, Family Life and Medicine were added in 1991. Signalling was dropped. Auto Mechanics was added in 1992. Rabbit Raising was dropped in 1993. That left 123 out of 172 (168) badges available.
There was a purge in 1996. Beekeeping (created in 1911), Machinery, Masonry, Botany, Metals Engineering, General Science, Consumer Buying and Agribusiness were all dropped. Crime Prevention was added. We now had 116 out of 173 (169) badges.
Archaeology, Climbing and Entrepreneurship were added in 1997. Snow Sports replaced Skiing in 1999, and this is not a drop of any program. So, we ended the 20th century with 119 out of 177 (172) badges available.
Fly Fishing was added in 2002.Composite Materials was added in 2005. Scuba Diving was added in 2009. That gave us 122 out of 180 (175) badges available heading into Scouting’s centennial.
For the 100th anniversary, Stalking was brought back for one year only but renamed Tracking. Carpentry and Pathfinding were also revived for the year. Signaling was brought back and designated as merit badge #141. The original Signaling (1910 to 1990) had been designated as merit badge #102. So, the 2010 Signaling is technically a new badge, but it is not a new, i.e. first time, program offering. Geocaching, Inventing and Scouting Heritage were added. That meant there were 129 merit badges available during 2010, out of 184 (counting both Signaling badges) (178).
In 2011, the four legacy badges were dropped, and Chess and Robotics were added. In 2012, we reached 130 available badges for the first time with the addition of Kayaking, Search and Rescue and Welding.
In 2013 and 2014, Computers was split into Game Design, Programming and Digital Technology. Cinematography was replaced by Moviemaking, Neither of those constitute dropped program. Sustainability and Mining in Sociiety were added. That gave us 134 badges available out of 195 (187).
In 2015, we got Animation and Signs, Signals, and Codes. In 2017, Exploration was added. It is the 137th merit badge currently available, the 198th unique merit badge and represents the 190th topic offered through the merit badge program, meaning 53 topics have been deleted. That works out to 27% of all merit badge topics ever offered having been deleted already.
Ten of the 14 badges of merit from 1910 remain in existence today. If you consider Signs, Signals and Codes to be a revival of Singaller, then it’s 11.
There are 37 of the 57 badges form 1911, still available, not counting Signaling. Three of the 20 badges from 1911 that have been dropped were split into multiple badges that remain available: Marksmanship, Civics and Craftsmanship. So, 40 of the 57 topics are still covered.
If we look at the explosive growth in the number of merit badges in recent years and what is happening with Cub Scout adventures, can a purge of merit badges be far behind? It’s been more than 20 years since we had one. I think we’re due.
I think there are two possible reasons for the cuts. The official reason is to keep the program “relevant for today’s families.” The other suspected reason is financial.
The first reason apparently has to do with 19 elective Adventures that “do not meet the standards of youth and den leader engagement.” The article mentions 3% as the lower limit of recorded participation. I wonder what the upper cutoff point is? 5%? 10%? If participation percentage is the metric used to cut the program elements, I imagine there are a good handful of merit badges that have similar participation rates. Will those be cut, too?
This whole idea of “relevance” is puzzling. Which subjects are more relevant to today’s families? Many Cub Scout-age kids play video games on consoles and mobile devices. Video games are certainly relevant. Should we make an Adventure for playing video games? If there was one, I expect the engagement rate would be very high. Many families make poor food choices for their kids, resulting in more overweight kids. Eating fast food and junk food is certainly relevant to today’s families. Should we make a Candy Making adventure? I’m sure the engagement rate for that one would shoot through the roof!
The whole point of Cub Scout adventures is to expose youth to new things they may not have otherwise had a chance to experience! Look at ANY of the required adventures. How is using a pocket knife or cooking outdoors with a cast iron Dutch oven relevant to today’s families, for example? Or identifying local plants and wildlife? Or learning how to use woodworking tools? These things are irrelevant to most American families today. If the required adventures were optional, many would see equally low participation rates.
It should be obvious that having a greater variety of options means each option will see a smaller number of participants. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. It just means that scouts and leaders have more options to choose from. That’s good! If you reduce the variety, obviously the participation rates of the remaining options will increase, but it also means fewer options to choose from. Personally, I like having lots of options to choose from, so I see the cuts as a negative development.
But maybe the real reason isn’t relevance or engagement rates. Maybe the real reason has to do with money – specifically the expenses of keeping those 19 elective adventures intact.
So, what are those expenses, exactly? Honestly, I can think of very few. The typesetting and layout of the handbooks and leader guides are already done. Same for the belt loops, as the printing plates or screens have already been made. Those are sunk costs. The space for storing and displaying the loops at scout shops is minimal. All 19 could be displayed in two 3 x 30 inch trays, more or less. That doesn’t take up much room on a store shelf. The costs for manufacturing the loops have to be pretty minimal. They are made in China – they probably cost a few nickels each to make, if that much. And it’s not like BSA gives them away for free. Packs and families do pay for them.
So what other costs are there? Some here have mentioned costs related to “supporting” the adventures. Could someone please elaborate on what they mean by support? Is there some support phone number I can call where a dedicated support specialist will talk me through the Grow Something adventure? It sounds silly but honestly I’m not trying to be funny. In the four years I’ve spent as a Cub Scout den leader, I’ve never heard of getting “support” from paid professionals at the district, council, or national levels, for any adventure. If I have a question or need guidance for a particular adventure, I can talk to other volunteers either in-person or online in forums like this one.
On the other hand, consider all the financial implications of cutting these 19 adventures:
Graphic designers, copywriters, editors, and serious printing resources will be needed to publish new handbooks and den leader guides, not to mention updating the Guide to Insignia and other printed resources I am forgetting. That will be a huge undertaking.
Time and effort (= money) will be spent by the Scoutbook team to update requirements and adjust for dependencies in Scoutbook and IA2, not to mention educating and supporting the user base on how to handle the changes.
The NOVA awards [edit: and World Conservation Award] will have to be revamped as some the canceled adventures we part of the award requirements.
I guarantee the costs in money, time, and effort to cut the 19 will be greater than if national had just left them in place.
So this decision makes little sense, both program-wise and in terms of cost.
And they are choosing to implement this change now, while in the middle of a costly lawsuit, staff cuts, during a time when scouting is facing real existential threats!
I just have to shake my head and breath. It’s too easy to become frustrated at this organization’s leadership. I just wish it would adopt a new doctrine when it comes to making changes like this. If such an idea gets proposed, just do the opposite.
At least they have given a years notice so we can do the ones we want for this coming program year. I’ll make sure my new Webelos know which ones will disappear for their AOL year so they can do the ones they like before they are gone. I think we may need to do them earlier in the year than later just to make sure the loops/pins are available for purchase.
Earlier in the year starts no later than the day after the last day of this school year - that is if you were fortunate to keep your den on track due to Covid restrictions.
Over the summer they can enjoy earning the National Summertime Pack Award, work on the Cub Scout Oudoor Activity Award, go to camp, and work on those Adventures that are sunsetting.
I agree that cutting these Adventures has nothing to do with relevance.
Maybe if they were replaced with something else more “relavent”? (whatever that is)?
What is the upside to dropping them?
How does it save money? I would think they would be happy to get the $2.29 each for a few more adventure loops/pins sold, and not have to revise the program books, computer programs, Leader guides, etc.
Maybe they want the income for leaders having to purchase new program materials. (With the higher signup/recharter fees, it costs enough as is.)
Different units and leaders have different passions and backgrounds, and I would think that a wider range of adventure topics would be more relevant.
Any way to have this decision reversed?
Contact Anthony Berger who serves as the Cub Scouting National Director.
I believe his email is Anthony.Berger @scouting.org.
I’m told he’s also on FB.
Contact your Council Advancement Chair, your district Advancement Chair. Contact other chairs at neighboring councils.
I wish you luck.
@ClaudeCarter - There are certainly costs with having adventures available. Supporting materials need to be monitored. It’s an ongong process to ensure that each adventure can still be completed safely and that resources remain available to den leaders. If there are limited staff resources to accomlish this, it becomes a choice of whether they should do an okay job of keeping watch over about 110 adventures or a great job with 90.
There’s also a cost to the existence of the recognition items. The BSA needs to pay for the metal loops in advance. They may sit in in ventory for months or years before the money comes back. They need to be distributed nationwide and even abroad. Before they are sold, they need to be stored somewhere, and there is a cost associated with the space used for that.
Anthony Berger did a great job discussing this matter on Cub Chat Live yesterday. You can watch it at https://fb.watch/5vG0OsSMAg/
I suspect that I’m wasting time with this, but I still do not understand how dropping an existing program saves money, or makes the overall program better. And presenting the changes (drops!!) as making the program more relevant does not compute!! I have been a Cub Committee Chairman for about 40 years, (also BSA Lifeguard instructor and on staff at 2017 Nat’l & 2019 World Jamborees) and, except for the program materials which are published when the program changes, I do not think I have ever had any support from anybody above district (volunteer) level. Now you have to republish all the Cub program materials, which will cost BSA money to do, but I suspect it will make BSA money as the leaders must now purchase updated material.
How much does “monitoring” program materials cost? (Maybe run a computer inventory report on a regular basis, and re-order low supplies?)
The loops/pins exist. So now you think you can save money by throwing them away, rather than selling them for $1.69 or $2.29 each. I don’t see how that is profitable. They are not that big; storing them can’t cost that much. You are not selling them below cost.
I listened to the Cub Chat, and thought there was very little actual “meat” in it. They totally revised the Cub Program in 2015 (I think that was the year) (and 2011, and 1998, and ???) with all new material, then made “tweaks” to it 2 years later. This seems to contradict some of Nick’s arguments. And with all advancements going into Scoutbook, it should be easy to know which items in an adventure are being earned (when choice is to earn 2 of the 5, for example), and tweak the requirements if necessary.
He used as the main argument for dropping the adventures as having an outing, and 90% do not want to attend, so they should cancel it. I strongly disagree with that!. The activity (if a new event) should have been discussed /presented in committee meeting, when enthusiasm would be judged. If there was sufficient interest and the activity was scheduled, our pack would not cancel it if 10% wanted to participate. Everyone is different, and those 10% may be passionate about the event. The next pack down the street (or next state over) may find that adventure more appealing, and have 90% participation.
What if your local grocery store decided to not carry your favorite beer (or ??) because only 3% of the shoppers bought it? Doesn’ t make sense!
Don’t bother wasting both of our times by replying. Do something “constructive”!
I would bet given how BSA operates that there might also be liability reasons for discontinuing some of these adventures. Fix It might have led to some scout thinking they could mess with a circuit board. Motor Away could resulted in the wrong propellants being used. They seem innocuous to me but just look at G2SS and how many things are now disallowed due to liability issues.
The entirety of your post was lost on that part.
That’s forty years worth of lost opportunities to develop the leadership skills of fellow Scouters.
That actually is how grocery stores work, though. That is how they stay relevant to the masses and keep customers. If they kept all of the things that so few people bought, they would go out of business.