TAHAWK

double(This message has been edited by TAHAWK)

Bans seem to originate mostly with folks who are not very knowledgeable on the subject matter. So some guys in suits ban "sheath knives" and leave Scouts to handle the large BSA utility and boning knives (AKA "Sticker") in the conditions of a typical council camp campsite (crowded) while removing all official training on fixed-blade knives. No to mention 4" folding "tantos" made by "CHINA" (optimized as weapons) but AOK because they fold (often on the user's hand). In the same manner, telescoping stocks were banned as EVIL by federal law, but folding stocks were AOK. 0___0 Flash suppressors were banned as EVIL but compensators were AOK (the better to execute rapid fire?). =___= If you are afraid of a thing about which you are relatively clueless, the terms of your rules may be a tad irrational - like your fear. Nuts. Just stop blaming "national."(This message has been edited by TAHAWK)

In theory, no "knife" with a blade 2.5" or longer may be possessed in any "public place" in the City of Cleveland, Ohio. There is a fine and mandatory jail sentence for violation. This ordinance, an interpreted by the courts generations ago and if enforced, would bar knives used by customers at restaurants (all I should think - even McD's), not to mention the restaurant kitchens and the stores that supply them. My gentle Swiss Army Knife fails the test by 3/16". As for local option bans within B.S.A., my council's two-year old total ban on fixed-blade knives just went away with the paid Scouter who came up with it.

Second, While the situation that you describe is unreasonable - and unfortunate behavior in terms of the long-term survival prospects for the unit, such situations are hardly unique to Scouting. Many unreasonable demands are made on us. Government demands alone are an entire category. Transportation is a Committee function and the Committee should explain that what you describe is not "kind" and cannot go on if the troop wants the resource that adult drivers provide. If controlling adult numbers means THAT much, the camping sites need to be MUCH closer. B.S.A. offers training on conflict resolution.

I heard today - AGAIN - that "national Boy Scouts bans sheath knives." B.S.A. never prohibited sheath knives but "did not encourage" "large sheath knives" -- except for fishing. The stated rationale was that "large sheath knives" are clumsy and unnecessary. That left room for judgment by local Scouters. In 2007, B.S.A. started selling the B.S.A. Complete Guide to Wilderness Survival. Two copies where on the shelves at the local [b.S.A.] Scout Shop last Tuesday. That book advocates use, at least in the wilderness, of very large knives - bolos and khukuris. In June, 2008, Boys Life answered the following question with the following opinion: "Q. Im going on a camping trip with my troop, but my hunting knife broke. I see a lot of different hunting knives advertised. How do I know which one to buy? Knifeless Neil, Summerville, S.C. A. The best type of knife for camping trips and most any other outdoor activity, for that matter is a short, fixed-blade knife with a beefy handle. Folding pocketknives can fold up on your hand while cutting. Not fixed blades. And remember: When it comes to blades, bigger isnt always better. Avoid blades longer than four inches. A small, sharp blade can cut just as well as a long one, but its safer to handle and easier to maneuver in tight spots. With a good fixed blade youll be set for most anything the outdoors can throw at you whittling, cutting, notching, butchering, filleting, even spreading peanut butter." The Guide to Safe Scouting was amended in 2011 to include the following statement: "We believe we have a duty to instill in our members, youth and adult, the knowledge of how to use, handle, and store legally owned knives with the highest concern for safety and responsibility." So when you hear that B.S.A. bans sheath knives, set 'em straight. There are enough real rules we have to follow without inventing more. Now we need to get teaching about fixed-blade knives back in the Handbook, back in Tot 'N Chip, and into IOLS so we can do our "duty to instill in our members, youth and adult, the knowledge of how to use, handle, and store legally owned knives with the highest concern for safety and responsibility."

In theory, is it not the obligation of the Committee Chair to educate parents about the adult role in Scouting? Is it not the obligation of the Committee to be sure parent are kept informed? It was once. As for the adult role, it's not in or out/you don't want me or you do. It's what is is: doing for the Scouts what they cannot do for themselves - being resources. That role would include providing transportation and required adult supervision for activities. I don't think that role is hard for most adults to understand even if it is hard for many to execute. And if no one explained, then one might be confused. If you are more comfortable characterizing this role as "We want you when we want you," you are 100% correct - and sound pretty unhappy. "Welcome to the Troop X family, Mr. and Mrs. A, B, C, D, etc. On the board are the tasks (not titles) we have as adults in that family. Which of these tasks would you be most comfortable doing? You would know better than I do. Keeping the medical forms up to date? Arranging transportation?" Parents "welcomed" at any activity? Well, in the nicest possible way, emphatically no. Not excluded but no "open door" policy either. This is the time when the boys are learning to leave the nest - to become independent actors in life and leaders of their peers. If Mom and Dad are always there, you simply do not get the desired effect. That would be Cubbing - family-centered. This is Scouting - boy gang centered. Speaking of Cubbing, very, very few of the Commissioned Scouts I have encountered in three councils were not adults in Cubbing before they were adults in Scouting. That includes not just unit Scouters but the district and council-level volunteer leaders, the SE of my current council (who has a son in Cubbing), the CD of this year's Wood Badge course (and the last five such courses to my knowledge), and our Council Training Chair. I had three years in Cubbing, and I am prepared to deal with anyone who might give me a hard time about it. Just never had the occasion. I keep hearing about this prejudice against Cubbing experience, but I have missed it in 42 years in the program. I to wish things were better - even perfect. What things? Training. Human relations. All things great and small. But you know, we just have imperfect clay to deal with. Too bad they are not all perfect like us. 0___0

My first Scout campout was in the desert at a place called Deep Creek (and it had a creek, although disappointingly shallow). Noting a significant wind and the ease with which tent stakes went into the sand, I piled rocks on the tent's "sod cloth" (q.v.). This got a lot of laughs from the older Scouts. That night, an unpredicted thunderstorm brought heavy rain and 75 mph winds. This was not good for tents staked into sand, so down they went and, in some cases, off they went. A couple of the adult pop-up tents were never found. Trailers were flipped over. Ten other Scouts ended up with me and my tent-mate in our "2-man" "Explorer" tent. Think Gerbils. After the hyperventilating stopped, those Scouts present thought it was a great adventure. Ahh! The smell of the air the next morning. The soaked and hollow-eyed adults with their 1000-yard stares!!! For years, you were a member of a special club if you had survived the Deep Creek Hurricane. "You think THIS is windy. Why let me tell you . . . ." Disaster survived has its own allure. Which is why this is an adult call.

When I was active as a district leader some years ago, we went through six DE's in 2.5 years. One quit in ten days -- never met a single one of us. One was a good friend - to this day. That rate of change was not unusual in that council under that SE. Today, that council is losing 10-20% of its DE's a year through resignation, transfers, or firing. Seems like those that resign are the ones we volunteers want to keep. How DE vacancies are handled depends primarily on how your SE wants it handled and how well the SE can carry out those intentions. The SE may want to transfer a current DE, reach out to another council, or hire off the street. You could ask. The council I am in now has resorted to volunteers to act as DE's and use of "paraprofessionals" as DE's due to lack of funds. If you are asking if a new DE will be different than the old DE, probably yes. Change is stressful, not necessarily improvement, and wholly unavoidable.

As has been said, it's a matter of judgment. No one here has any more information than you had. I too have experienced heavy rain in California where hills were present - and helped dig for bodies. I'm in Ohio now, and few here would fully understand. Drive south a few hours to West Virginia, and they get it. As for who's call this is, safety is a non-delegable responsibility of adults. That's the deal we agree to as Scouters. Scouts can be a force multiplier and extra eyes but it's your call. Having said that, not involving the troop leadership in a discussion would miss an opportunity. Discussing the situation with those leaders is also respectful of their roles as leaders. They can then pass on the word and the reasoning to the other Scouts. It's also an opportunity for them to come up with "Plan B."

Council camps, even those established in the 1920's, have "troop sites" that cram campers together - adults and Scouts. (Anyone know of a council camp that would allow patrols to be even fifty yards apart? There must be one.) I feel lucky to have spent forty of my forty-one years with troops that do their own, independent summer camp at least half the years. The first troop routinely took over 100 Scouts to camp. If it was the council camp (our council's camp), two adults stayed the week. The tents were all pretty close. If that troop was doing their own summer camp, more adults stayed as Merit Badge Counselors. In that case, adults and patrols were all in sites separated as the space allowed - sometimes more than 100 yards, sometimes less. If no one yelled, you certainly could not eavesdrop. The second troop always had lots of adults when it did it's own summer camp, almost all as Merit Badge Counselors. We usually rented a Scout camp that no longer was used for summer camping by the council that operated it. Each patrol had it's own "troop site" -- whichever one they picked. All were well over 100 yards apart. Adults ditto. When were at one of the many council camps we tried out, a slightly lesser number of adults attended (weighted towards dads of younger Scouts). They came as drivers. The council camps we attended were all many hours away. A couple of times, the camps were days away. We absolutely did plan for how to keep the adult interference to a minimum. The troop I am with now is a adult-run camping club for boys. 50+ Scouts and too many adults at all times. "Too many" in the absolute sense (20+ watching every minute of every troop meeting) and in the sense that they just never stop playing the parent role. Last summer, seven troop adults were present every day at Merit Badge Camp. However, it was two who were outstanding. Boy did they stand out! They just would not shut up. One is a very active Committee members. She is always parneting. The other one tells anyone who asks (and some who do not) that he is the "Troop Quartermaster." He is also the World's Leading Authority. They kept up a nearly constant stream of advice, suggestions, comments, orders (usually yelled), and remarks. OK. it was not constant. It only seemed that way. It did tend to keep kids out of the troop site. ^___^ So what? I think the answer to the OP's issue depends on who the adults are (Do they "play the game"?) and where they are situated in relationship to the Scouts more than it depends on any magic ratio. Having said that, two would be better than any greater number unless they are there as MBC's.

"I recall a thread here a while back where one of our members was trying to put together a reasonable test-out for IOLS and to the best of my recollection it didn't seem to be working out - the test out would require nearly as much time as the class. I may have missed a follow-up that solved the problem though, seems like it was a year or so ago. How do the test outs work in your neck of the woods, TAHAWK?" Ah, but I did not say there was a test. ^___^ As I have witnessed it, the Camp staff member handling the "qualification" asks the applicant Scouter about his training and experience. There were a few pointed questions about Scoutcraft (For example, one Applicant was asked to describe the official BSA method of washing dishes - the dangerously incorrect one in the 11th Edition Handbook that put the chlorine in the single, hot rinse. The applicant said Hot wash; hot rinse; cold sanitizing rinse. After some harrumping, that answer was accepted - solely on the grounds that it was manifestly correct, if contrary to BSA standards, and also because the applicant was a Phd in Microbiology.) The "qualification" I have seen is the furthest thing from methodical and never took even an hour. It clearly helped to be an Eagle Scout. "Ah, but I did not say they were the people IOLS was intended to help. I just said they were the people who benefit most from it. The two aren't always the same thing... " The doctrine of unintended consequences is alive and well all over the world. Think what might happen if there was actual training in teaching outdoor skills -- tips from old farts about time-tested ways to teach. "But IOLS certainly doesn't teach T-2-1 skills. My goodness no, not if you didn't already have them. I respectfully think it's a bit mad to believe a previous outdoor novice is qualified to take youths out into the woods after a single night "camping" in an unheated cabin surrounded by several dozen experienced outdoorsmen. It takes longer than that to learn the skills, especially to the point where you can use them while also keeping an eye on the youth program going on around you. That's one reason I like the apprentice idea. Yes, it is a time commitment, but honestly, I don't think the necessary skills can be fast-tracked. The phrase is usually rendered as "experienced woodsman" rather than "skilled wooodsman." It does take a little time out there to have some idea what you're doing. But while someone's learning, they don't have to be a useless third-wheel or sequestered in an adults-only training class. They can be helping the Troop while they learn if they have a mentor, so the time commitment really shouldn't be anything more than what they would be doing as an ASM anyway. Someone who spends a year camping with a good Troop with a solid core of SMASMs is going to be far better trained than an IOLS graduate who is on his own after the course ends." Like almost every BSA syllabus, there is not nearly enough time to teach the material described - especially in an interactive (i.e. effective) way with actual application immediately after E and D. A few good questions, one or two war stories, and a couple of good ideas from the "participants" and the session is WAY behind. All you can hope for is that a few ideas stick and you have given the "participants" resources for further learning in the form of websites, books, and people they meet through attending. This IS an important addition to their "tool box" because BSA literature does not supply the needed information. For example, the Handbook does not contain enough information on woods tools to pass Tot 'N Chip and the current, soon to be gone, "Fieldbook," which formerly supplemented the Handbook on Scoutcraft topics, has almost no Scoutcraft in it --- no information on woods tools except for a single reference to a sheathed rescue knife for watercraft use. There is no great demand for better. Those that don't know also largely don't know what they are missing. And that group includes the policy makers at the corporation.

"The second thing that bothers me is the one-size fits all approach to training. IOLS is no where near enough training for someone without much outdoors experience. It's a waste of time for a SM with 20 years experience and a solid outdoor background . . . ." One can qualify out of IOLS, at least in the councils in this part of the U.S. No rigorous examination, and as you noted there is no testing as such at IOLS. I was simply told "forget it" when I asked if I should take IOLS. I "Somewhere in the middle are Scouters with solid outdoor experience but no experience in leading youth's in the outdoors - they benefit from IOLS." IOLS is not intended to be leadership training. It is simply intended to teach Scoutcraft to adults up through First Class level. It does not even explicitly cover Scoutcraft teaching technique (say tips and tricks in teaching knife-sharpening), although one can pick stuff up by paying attention to how IOLS staffers teach the skills. If a Scouter could pass the Scoutcraft portion of the requirements for First Class, he should qualify out of IOLS. "Can we deputize experienced SMASMs to take on 'apprentices' and let the apprentices become 'trained' through association with these experienced folks? Seems that's more likely to instill the skills and knowledge to run a safe and effective program." Interesting idea. That would require a time commitment on both sides of the process. The "student" must have a desire to learn, and in a volunteer organization that desire has to come from within. Anyone with that desire will find there are more resources from which to learn than time to learn more than a fraction. One can be a student for life. Example: CDC Guide to wild water treatment in which it is revealed that the current Handbook and Wilderness Survival MB pamphlet are both unreliable on water treatment: http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/travel/backcountry_water_treatment.html B.S.A currently is thinking about what this means.

0___0

Please comment. Wilderness Survival, I think, should teach that the response to an emergency is to admit there is a problem (famously, "Houston, we have a problem."); thoughtfully adapt your behavior to deal with the problem; improvise with what you have to work your planned adaptation; and be determined to overcome the problem. It seems to me that "Admit; Adapt; Improvise; and Overcome" presents a more useful mantra than the current "STOP," which is merely a tool to address the need to think straight. Under the view I propose, the gear made available in a wilderness survival exercise, a form of role-playing that appeals to kids, will present them with greater or lesser challenges in adaptation and and improvisation. So a Hot Spark presents one level of challenge and material to make a bow-and-drill set a much greater challenge. Thus also with a pot to boil water vs. an empty two-litre plastic beverage container. So we have a range of choices.

Sorry, while I take the points of the last two posts, I just don't "get" the relevance in the context of the OP's issue. "Just had a friend call me and tell me that in order to get his paperwork signed to volunteer at NOAC he had to cut the council FOS program a check for $155 ( family level suuport in our council). He thought the DE was messing with him, so he went to the council offices and talked to a field director and the CFO. Both told him that was the new policy and it would be published shortly. It would apply to all regional and national volunteer spots (NOAC, Jambo, etc). So now on top of paying to serve we have to pay extra to volunteer." Are we talking about a policy originating with volunteers?

One of Mr. West's favorite words was "control." (It led him to seriously propose that Scoutmaster's be B.S.A. employees. The National Board them began succession planning.)

If they are employees and it's a job assignment, they should be paid. In fact, in some states, they must be paid. It's not the rate of pay - low enough for most. It's how many we are paying for, unlike the rest of the world. Plus there is the issue, with many of the paid Scouters, of value added. Fewer, with better pay, might be a better value.

Asking relevant questions, however politely, can get you red-carded. Is it not possible that irrationality in financial record-keeping is less the result of a conspiracy to obscure than a lack of ability in the paid decision-makers? While some are among the finest Scouters - and people -- I have ever met, for many Scouting was the employer of last resort which could not, in the event, be escaped. A penny for a spool of thread; a penny for a needle; $1,000,000 for personnel; pop goes the budget.

It makes me wonder. Forget theory, what is the actual, real-world purpose of B.S.A.? Making payroll?

Considerable paper and electronic literature on water purification is inaccurate, including the 2010 Handbook and 2008 Wilderness Survival Merit badge pamphlet (but not other BSA publications, such as the book "Don't Get Sick" and a recent article in Scouting [magazine]). Current advise from private and public authorities is that iodine and regular chlorine (Sodium hypochlorite) are minimally effective against protozoans, which form protective cysts. Unfortunately, protozoans are the most widely-distributed bio hazard in wild water, being found, for example, in every county in Maine. Here is a sample from the U.S. CDC "Cryptosporidium is poorly inactivated by chlorine or iodine disinfection. Water can be treated effectively by boiling or filtration with an absolute 1-m filter. Specific information on preventing cryptosporidiosis through filtration can be found in Cryptosporidiosis: A Guide to Water Filters (www.cdc.gov/parasites/crypto/gen_info/filters.html)." Also: http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/travel/backcountry_water_treatment.html Accord, Mayo Clinic; Wilderness Medical Society; Red Cross; Surgeon General; all branches of U.S. Military. Do a Google on cryptosporidium and Milwaukee to see a major failure of Chlorine.

Assembling a PSK, as noted, helps boys focus on survival needs - "priorities." As life is not without crisis, this is a useful exercise with application outside the wilderness. Also, it helps teach that one may do more than hope to be lucky, as were the lost Scouts mentioned. Fortune favors the prepared -- that "Be Prepared" thing.

"Flashlights" these days can be as small as a couple of Quarters. Iodine, like regular chlorine, will not eliminate giardia or cryptosporidium, the Handbook to the contrary notwithstanding. Hence, having a small metal vessel to boil water is good, although aluminum foil, used VERY carefully, can serve. Many PSK's propose a metal cup as the container. A "button" compass takes up little room and works well navigating to a "base line" feature. Fire is a great multi-use tool (98.6/water/signaling/morale), so a source of ignition is good. BSA Hot Spark is small. A plastic whistle qualifies (and can also be used as . . . ). A balloon can replace the condom, is sturdier, and has uses other than a water container (Scouts regularly come up with five uses for a balloon.)

"'And should we not use the Roman or Greek format as even more 'traditional?' Romans & Greeks had Boy Scouts? Cool!" Soma Hellinon Proskopon (Σώμα Ελληνων Προσκόπων, ΣΕΠ): http://www.facebook.com/pages/%CE%A3%CF%8E%CE%BC%CE%B1-%CE%95%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%AE%CE%BD%CF%89%CE%BD-%CE%A0%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%83%CE%BA%CF%8C%CF%80%CF%89%CE%BD/138314816192767 http://www.romascoutcenter.com/ (^____^)

When they are backpacking, they should have the "Essentials," whatever they are for the there and then. A "Personal Survival Kit" ("PSK") is a selection of basic survival gear so compact and so light that the Scout will never be tempted to leave it behind and would not lose (or abandon) if the boat flips or he goes down crossing a stream. It can be in a pouch, pockets, and/or strung around the neck. As a PSK gets larger and heavier, it can do more. Eventually, it crosses an imprecise line and becomes an "Essentials" selection and not a PSK. For example, a PSK deals with the 98.6 survival need with fire-building gear and a plastic trash bag, not extra clothing (well, maybe a watch cap). The "Essentials" deals with 98.6 with fire AND insulation layer(s), outer layers, and (often)a tent or good tarp (the "shelter" tool). I have looked at dozens of "Essentials" lists. They vary, and almost none have as few as ten items. (Sometimes they reach "ten" by such devices as "3. map and compass.") But there is nothing magic about ten.

As to knives, B.S.A. never prohibited sheath knives and only "did not encourage" "large sheath knives" -- except for fishing. The GTSS was amended in 2011 to include the following statement: "We believe we have a duty to instill in our members, youth and adult, the knowledge of how to use, handle, and store legally owned knives with the highest concern for safety and responsibility." In my council, a short-lived ban on fixed blade knives at council's camp was eliminated this January. So what is the point about "sheath knives." As to Morse Code, would not semaphore be more "traditional"? And should we not use the Roman or Greek format as even more "traditional"?