TAHAWK

Eamonn, if my experience was a single exception, I would have no concern. I think there are many exceptions. Further, "a new member is a new team" is part of this theory of team development. As it happens in my personal example, some fo the team were strangers to most of the team -- one a stranger to all others in the team. Most of the team emphatically didn't want to be on the team. "High enthusiasm"? Hardly. I have deliberately not quoted from the WB or NYLT syllabii, nor will I. But if you know "what's in there," what do you think of the difference between Tuckman's model and the WB/NYLT version? Or Blanchard's, for that matter? Have we improved on Tuckman and Blanchard or failed to understand? BrentAllen, There is no question that the message some see in WB and especially NYLT is that there is a set order - FSNP. That is contrary to Tuckman's message. Beyond that, Tuckman defines the stages differently. If we are going to discuss specific syllabus/PP slide language, it needs to take place elsewhere.

"[T]he BSA position still seems a useful model for discussing group dynamics in general terms." Sure. But if the message is that ALL teams go through these stages in this order or that in its initial stage a team is ALWAYS "high enthusiam/low skill," we don't necessarily have a tool any more. We may have something more like an article of faith. Commentary: "The sheer scale of such theory - by seeking to present a universal or general picture can mean it over-reaches itself. While there may be some 'universals of development' when we come to examine, in this case, the individual group things are rarely that straightforward. Human processes are frequently characterised by variability and flux. Furthermore, our own experiences of groups are likely to show significant deviations from the path laid out by stage theories. 'Stages' may be missed out, other ways of naming a phase or experiences may be more appropriate." Moreover, as I suggested in my OP, I am not sure Tuckman's "stages" are being accurately described. The closest he came to "low skills" was "relatively uninformed on the issues and objectives of the team."

"Comments: The Guide to Safe Scouting states that knives are part of the program, but that long sheath knives should be avoided. (But even then, there is no statement that they're "banned"). above is from US Scouts. they probably don't want to see any military Bowies." GSS says: "Avoid large sheath knives. They are heavy and awkward to carry, and unnecessary for most camp chores except for cleaning fish." US Scouts would probably faint if they saw pictures of Troop 43 in 1954 -- all those surplus Mk II Fighting/Utility knives with 7" clip blades might be mistaken for "military bowies." Still, they are smaller than the monsters shown in some official BSA publications today (think of 13" blades close to 1/2" thick).

I read and am told in Scouting that "all" teams follow the model of team development taught in Wood Badge and NYLT. The first stage ("Forming") is said to be characterized by high enthuisiasm and low skill. Compare to: "In the first stages of team building, the forming of the team takes place. The team meets and learns about the opportunity and challenges, and then agrees on goals and begins to tackle the tasks. Team members tend to behave quite independently. They may be motivated but are usually relatively uninformed on the issues and objectives of the team. Team members are usually on their best behavior but very focused on themselves. Mature team members begin to model appropriate behavior even at this early phase. Sharing the knowledge of the concept of "Teams - Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing" is extremely helpful to the team. Supervisors of the team tend to need to be directive during this phase. The forming stage of any team is important because in this stage the members of the team get to know one another, exchange some personal information, and make new friends. This is also a good opportunity to see how each member of the team works as an individual and how they respond to pressure." Not quite the same. As it happens, I was a member of a team ay work that started with very, very low enthusiasm. ("This job is career suicide" was an observation that got majority support.) I don't know if "skills" were low, but relevant information was certainly low. So call it "low morale and low competency." In the end, the team pulled off what our CEO called a "miracle." I feel that perhaps the qualifiers used by Tuckman and Blanchard have been overlooked. I am generally suspicious of any statement of human behavior that includes "all." I would like to engage in a meaningful discussion of how the writings of Tuckman and Blanchard have been taken up by, or morphed by, BSA in Wood Badge and NYLT. I cannot find anyone locally who feels comfortable talking about this topic one-on-one -- even with a vow of confidentiality. They seem to catch a whiff of heresy in the air. Suggestions?(This message has been edited by TAHAWK)

BSA has no rational policy on knives. A couple of official BSA publications "do not encourage" or counsel that Scouts shold "avoid" "large sheath knives," wharever that means. (Does it, for example, cover large folding knives routinely carried in sheaths?) The only stated rationale for that advice is that "large sheath knives . . . can be heavy and awkward to carry and are unnecesary for most camp chores." BSHB 12th ed. p. 403. Please note the absence of any reference to safety concerns. (Are they as heavy and awkward to carry and as unnecessary as a axe in this age of LNT?) The stated exception (GTSS) is a knife to clean fish. The specific exception suggests that a filteting knife is a "large sheath" knife. Otherwise, why an exception? (Fixed-blade knives are required for food preparation for groups of a certain size by public health laws in many jurisdictions.) Despite the above, two current, official BSA publications suggest, discuss the use of, and illustrate VERY large knives, namely khukuris, bolos, and machetes. I find no BSA statement on tactical" folding knives -- knives optimized as weapons -- or folding knives in general. Some years ago, safe use of the fixed-blade knife was removed from the Tot'N'Chip requirements. When to comes down to it, BSA policy is largely irrelevant because BSA allows units and Councils to have any rules about knives that they wish. There are units and Councils that purport to totally ban "all sheath knives" and/or "all fixed-blade knives." Some purport to ban lock-blade knives or knives beyond a certain length. Vague notions of "safety" are the only basis for these arbitrary "bans" that I have ben able to discover. Of course, there is no consideration of any obligation to teach safe use of such tool that is so common as the fixed-blade knife. A lockblade knife of a given size and shape is, when locked open, indistingishable from a fixed-blade of the same size and shape when to comes to safety. It is safer than a non-locking knife of the same general size. BSA sells a fixed-blade knife with an 8" as part of the Chef's Kit. Most Councils that "ban" "all fixed-blade knives" sell the Chef's kit in their camp stores and allow use of fixed-blade knives in cooking and wood-working. So "ban." I WISH the BSA WOULD say: "Da BSA position is that Boy Scouts should be allowed to use all kinds of knives, and be taught how to use 'em properly as tools." But there are many things I wish.

Very interesting combination of symptoms. Missing data -- especially on the thickness of the Thrmorest and the results with the new sleeping bag. A Thermorest or similar pad for spring/sumemr/fall backpacking may we inadequate for "cold" weather camping(whatever that means where you are). ++ on the bottle suggestion. Most say that the inside liner and outside cover of sleeping bags should both breath to allow excess moisture to escape. If it's cold enough, there will be condensation - even ice --on the outside of the bag. Even colder, and the condensation can occur inside the cover. I have had ice inside the cover of a bag when it was -20F. If you end up with dampness against your skin, you will greatly accelerate heat loss. Is your sleeping bag and sleeping clothing dry when you get up in the morning? No PM's at this forum. Hmm. "the same principle works with the insulation in a home, thats why insulation is installed with the paper backing out rather than in, so the heat of the house can penetrate into the insulation)." The paper on backed fiberglass insulation is a vapor barrier. At least around here, the bats are to be installed with the paper toward the inside of the building (that's why there are flaps to allow stapling to the studs)to prevent moisture from entering the insulation and condensing inside the insulation, thus reducing its effectiveness. In a related fashion, there was a boomlet in the 1980's for vapor barrier liners ("Pleasure Packing" was one book that advocated it.) to increase sleeping bag efficiency. Few liked the claminess that resulted from sleeping on a plastic bag -- unless you got a perfect balance of ventilation.

It is often said that Scouters stand "in loco parentis" to Scouts attending Scouting events. When I have asked why that is said, I am told "because we are like the Scout's parents," an argument that assumes its own conclusion. Are we like the Scout's parents? Do we assume the role of a natural parent, including the obligations of support for and rearing and education of the child to the age of majority? In State v. Noggle, supra, the Ohio Supreme Court held in its syllabus: "1. The phrase person in loco parentis in R.C. 2907.03(A)(5) applies to a person who has assumed the dominant parental role and is relied upon by the child for support . . . The term in loco parentis means charged, factitiously, with a parents rights, duties, and responsibilities. Blacks law Dictionary (6 Ed. 1990) 787. A person in loco parentis has assumed the same duties as a guardian or custodian, only not through a legal proceeding. A person in loco parentis was grouped with guardians and custodians in the statute because they all have similar responsibilities. The phrase person in loco parentis in R.C. 2907.03(A)(5) applies to a person who has assumed the dominant parental role and is relied upon by the child for support. This statutory provision was not designed for teachers, coaches, scout leaders, or any other persons who might temporarily have some disciplinary control over a child. Simply put, the statute applies to the people the child goes home to." The Ohio decision was followed by the federal Court of Appeals in cases that did not rely on Ohio law: Powledge v. U.S., 193 F.2d 438, 441 n.5 (5th Cir. 1951) (analogizing persons in loco parentis to natural parents) and U.S. v. Floyd, 81 F.3d 1517, 1524 (10th Cir. 1996). In the Dale v BSA case, the New Jersey appllate court held as a matter of New Jersey law: "Boy Scouts does not assume those responsibilities or those duties. It does not maintain or rear children. A Boy Scout leader may function as a supervisor of children for limited periods of time; he does not have "the responsibility to maintain, rear and educate" children such that he stands in the place of a parent." The reversal of Dale by the U.S.S.C. did not touch on the New Jersey holding on the doctrine of in loco parentis. IF a Scouter was, in fact and in law, in loco parentis to a Scout, there would be no LEGAL need for permission slips of permission to obtain medical care. Is that enough basis for saying it's a myth?

He drugged a child and raped her. A child cannot legally give consent. Durgs interfere with the ability to give consent. He fled the jurisdiction before he could be sentenced to the lesser crime for which he was convicted Typically, if a suspect flees the jurisdiction, the statute of limitation stops running. Polanski thus faces charges for fleeing in addition to the original crime. And the court may not have to accept the original plea bargain.

scco40 posted: "'Old' Wood Badge - (Cub or Boy Scout? I'll assume Boy Scout) - sort of an advanced Introduction to Outdoor Leader Skills. "New" Wood Badge - sort of like a corporate training session on team formation, leadership skills, etc. Old Wood Badge is more like IOLS. New Woodbadge is more like an adult version of NYLT. Yes, all the above are gross generalizations. I used to be a Bear ... P.S. Novices type Woodbadge. Pros type Wood Badge." Actually, the first Wood Badge course was like advanced IOLS - all outdoor skills. Starting in 1972, the second Wood Badge course was a combination of outdoor skills and leadership skills. The third version of Wood Badge, Wood Badge for the 21st Century, focuses on leadership training. NYLT is a junior version of the present Wood Badge, not the other way around.

Tflytyer, thank you for staffing NYLT. There is often a problem getting adults to staff a week-long course. "I enjoyed my time taking Woodbadge in 1974." That would have been called "the new course" in 1974. "I think national should step up to the plate and create a course that will bridge this training deficiency the training courses." Not being flip at all. The course that covers the material not covered in the second WB course is the third version of Wood Badge, Wood Badge for the 21st Century. "You left alot of adult leaders out here with little options, and I understand that all the new courses are first filled by those leaders that have not taken the course previously. Leaving little chance for those of us that took the early course." In our area, there are more openings than there are Scouters to fill them. Few courses have all eight Patrols. Have you checked courses in neighboring Councils? In Ohio, two courses were cancelled for lack of the minimum number or "participants." The "minimum" would still leave eighteen openings. "First question is how many out there have taken both the old and new course?" Many in my Council. My Owl Patrol last year had four retreads out of five members. (And I was a Trooop Guide this year.) "Why should I have to pay twice for the privilege of earning my beads a 2nd time?" It's been said. It makes sense that you should have taken a course if you want to teach it. These are very different courses in some respects.

It happens in decades of Scoutjng that I sometimes need an issue clarified or dare think there is some issue on which I give helpful input, like the dangerously incorrect information on water purification in the new (and really improved) Boy Scout Handbook. I am repeatedly told that questions and comments are to go "to your Local Council." Often, Local Council gives me a big "Who knows?" They cannot offer additional insight or have no idea about the identity of a relevant decision-maker. I think they are being honest about their knowledge AND that they are not encouraged to make an effort to connect unpaid Scouters with people at National Council. Finding myself in that situation, it's not like wanting to communicate with the President, the Pope, Tiger Woods, or the CEO of AT&T. There is nowhere to mail a letter, no telephone number, and no email address. That would be a big "Who cares?" Scouting Magazine has helped. They have always acknowledged my contacts and almost always got an answer or response from National Council to my comment. But there is never direct communications with National Council, and the responses are often of the "Don't call us; we'll call you" variety. Millions of us, collectively over the years, some more "professional" regarding the topic in question than anyone at National Council, yet not an idea worth a plugged nickle? "The Adams' speak only to Cabots and the Cabots speak only to Lodges, and the Lodges speak only to God."

I have a piece of paper that says the Boy Scouts of America commissioned me as a Scoutmaster once upon a time. Apparently that has changed and now the CO appoints one a Scoutmaster. Yes? No? I thought the district Advancement Committee, on behalf of the B.S.of A. decided who was legitimately an Eagle, as opposed to someone who faked earning the required Merit Badges. Apparently that has changed. Ys? No?

Hey, Beav, what about "statists" - supporters of more and more power in the state vs. more local governments or the individual? S,F and C all have that in common. Not to mention the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP).

Not sure how excluding youth as participants you are working with at Wood Badge helps meet the Wood Badge goal of helping adults become more prepared to work with youth. If you find youthful enthusiasm troubling and diverse points-of-view a hassle, there are lessons to be learned in Wood Badge, were you willing.

Privacy? This got some "play" when rolled out under Clinton, but seems to be "under the radar" (probably because it was rolled out under Clinton). "http://www.fas.org/irp/program/process/echelon.htm "Kill" within ten words of "president" gets kicked out for "further analysis."

Was this a Scout Fair? If not, you might be talking about local and/or laws on carrying knives, and such laws are all over the lot. Not the fault of the BSA if such laws bar carrying sheath knives. As an alternative, any property owner or possessor, such as a fair operator, can set any rules he/she/it desires, including banning open display of knives. Again, not comparable to English Scout Assoc. knife rules.

In the UK carrying some knives (e.g., a folding knife with a 3.5" blade)is presumptively illegal unless you have a good reason. In the UK the carrying of other knves - an example being a standrad "Scout" pattern slipjoint knife, is presumptively legal - no explanation or reason required. Within part of the UK, English Scouting is suggesting -- "advising" -- that a more restrictuve practice be followed -Scouts not to carry knives of any kind to/from Scouting activities. This "dust up" across the seas is only important to the extent that it touches on the question of what Scouting is about doing here in the U.S. Should we be so mistrustful that we do not trust any Scouts with a common tool OR so focused on what some see as PC that we should ban that common tool? As most know, as many units and Councils have purported to totally ban all "sheath knives" or all "fixed-blade knives." Do things drive behavior or do values drive behavior - or both or other? Cherry pie?

I can only second the comments above. Our Troop frequently attends an international event in Dorchester, Canada. Thousands of Scouts from the US and Canada are treated to a camporee with so many events and venues that it is impossible to experience half of them in a weekend. 137 events/venues one year. I have seldom seen a paid Scouter there - perhaps two-three times since 1987. The camporee is planned by youth and staffed solely by Scouting youth and unpaid Scouters. Give it a visit. (If your unit might wish to go, there is a website for the Dorchester International Brotherhood Camporee: http://dibc.on.ca/. Apply months in advance; eight or nine months might be wise. Registration is open for 2010. Go see what it is possible for "only volunteers" to do. Then ask how in the world you need or want your DE to do something that is not his job to do.)

Narraticong, IMO you are on the right side in the debate. Your comments are thoughtful. But please reconsider saying things like, "Our young SPL transferred in from another troop about a year and a half ago. Apparently they took the BSA line on sheath knives to heart. None allowed." The "BSA line" contains no ban or disapproval of all "sheath knives." In some BSA publications they "do not encourage" "large sheath knives" - whatever "large" means. By negative implication, "Not Large" sheath knives are free from taint. Moreover, two current officical BSA publications, The Complete Wilderness Training Guide" and "The Survival Handbook, Essential Skills for Outdoors Adventure," (both available at or through your Scout Shop) illustrate and discuss use of short swords - the UK Ghurka-issue Mk V khukuri (less correctly, "kukri") Think of about 18" and 20 oz. of steel. The second book also discusses and illustrates bolos and machetes - "large" cutting tools by any standard. There is a struggle going on in Scouting between those who do not feel Scouts should be taught to use and allowed to use a common houshold tool, the fixed-blade knife, even as BSA sells fixed-blade knives. Apparently, the "thinking" is that things cause behavior, and Scouts and Venturers cannot be trusted. Or maybe its pure PC by "suits." Ever notice how sharp an arrowhead is or think of all the bad things one might do with an axe, .22, or rope? Good Lord! Hammers! Please, let's not help the banners. Instead, politly challenge bans in your Councils. We got relief from a ban at the camp we attended this Summer. Now, let's get fixed-blade knife use back in Tot'N'Chip! (Or we can just pretend there are no fixed-blades out there in the world our youth live in - such as the Official Chef's Kit.)

BP, I would respectfully suggest two things. The top leadership in my District has been there for an average that exceeds 20 years. During that time, we have averaged more than one DE per year. In one year, we had four. Yes, unpaid Socuters come and go, but paid Scouters do the same. (After all, many didn't want the job in the first place, perform in acordance with that situation, and leave ASAP. Who remains? The solid-gold lifers, bless them, who could afford to remain and those who can't get out despite their best efforts. Yes, I REALLY want that method to staff SM slots.) As for quality program and training being at odds with the metrics by which paid Scouter performance is measured, the behavior of paid Scouters would say they believe that statement. IMO, they are dead wrong in their behavior. Quality program and quality unit leadership PRODUCES good unit membership, numbers of healthy units, and unit and FOS money. We are simply dealing with the short-term focus on symptoms rather than focus on causes. (What DO they tell paid Scouters in their training?) I still have the job description card I was given when I first became a SM. The first obligation listed was training Scouts in leadership. Whoever composed that card knew the path to good results. If only. (emoticon for sighing goes here)

After nearly forty years in Scouting, I find no correlation between being paid and professionalism. The most professional Scouters I have ever known were/are not paid (only rewarded). And the money is just not there, even at Minimum Wage levels. If the pool of volunteers were deepr, Scouting could be more selective. Since the talent pool is not especially deep, making traing the highest priority seems the best course. But training does not appear to be the highest priority at any administrative level of Scouting.(This message has been edited by TAHAWK)

Sure. We were all tougher in the olden days. Drank the water. Boated without PFD's. No waistbelts on our packs. Unpadded shoulder straps. Drove all night to get to the mountains in those 1960's cars and "wagons." And so? No, I don't think we have devolved, but the "bugs" could be evolving. That's right! They are. The steady and dramatic increase in people in the backcountry means more mammals to spread the parasites giardia and cryptosporidium. Can we agree that we have an obligation to see to the safety of our Scouts, even on weekends when they will likely be home before the violent diarrhea and cramping hits? As noted, if it hits on a wilderness trek of several days duration, you could have real trouble -- the entire crew unable to care for themselves in even the most simple ways and out of cellphone range. Not in the "First World" anymore if that happens. "There is no reliable treatment for cryptosporidium enteritis." "Because many animals carry Cryptosporidium, it is common in both soil and untreated water. Lakes, rivers and streams can become contaminated by runoff which contains waste from infected animals Wildlife can also contaminate water. Research shows that Cryptosporidium can be found in 97% of surface water in the U.S. The amount of the parasite in water sources varies widely. Groundwater can, but is much less likely to, contain Cryptosporidium." American Waterworks Assoc. Experience and happiness with the SteriPen varies. http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=13247 "Chlorine and iodine are the two chemicals commonly used to treat water. They are somewhat effective in protecting against exposure to Giardia, but may not be effective in controlling more resistant organisms like Cryptosporidium. Chlorine is generally more effective than iodine in controlling Giardia, and both disinfectants work much better in warm water." USEPA "Don't rely on chlorine or iodine water purification tablets they're not always effective against giardia parasites. Iodine disinfection, for example, must be carried out for at least eight hours." Mayo Clinic So far as I can determine, the consensus of the authorities is that sodium hypochlorite and iodine products alone are risky to very ineffective to make water safe to drink. The consensus of authorities is that boiling or commercial filtration followed by water treatment chemicals per manufacturer's directions is safe. Simple solution, no? (American Red Cross seems overboard in wanting boil + bleach, but they care.) How KlearWater claims 30 mins max is astounding when the major manufacturer of C. dioxide products, AquaMira, labels their product with exposure times up to four hours. What should not surprise is that Scouting Magazine got it right in early 2001: http://www.scoutingmagazine.org/issues/0101/d-outs.html Just another example of the lack of communication within National Council. Official Scouting publications often contradict, sometimes within the same publication. Other links upon request

"Another question I have is, how did we a kids in the 60's 70's and 80's ever live, doing things like drinking from the creek or the water hose, paying outside ALL day until the street lights come on [?] It is just amazing that we are alive today." Point taken. But not all of the 60's, 70's and 80's kids are alive today. (You left out rigid-framed cars, no shoulder belts, and the ever-cool smoking.) Thus far, we have shown the ability to outbreed pathogens and diseases. In the 1980's and 1990's, before water purifiation -- and safe dish-washing -- was well-understood, diarrhea was so common at a rather well-known Scout high adventure destination as to be a topic of mirth at opening and closing campfires. Yet the problem was unknown to those "paranoid" types who boiled drinking water and used a cold water chlorine rinse as "Step 3" (See 12th Ed. BSHB at p. 327.) (I suppose they could have used the "bug spray" story.) In 1993 in Milwuakee, over 400,000 people became ill when sodium hypochlorite ("bleach") proved unable to kill cryptosporidium in the city water system. "Only" 100 died, but those who survived were typically disabled for days with diarrhea, severe abdominal cramps, and fever. DETAILS: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/331/3/161 Outside an urban environment, say on a two-week trek in the wilderness, that level of illness could be a problem, yes?

"Tahawk, Of our 8 methods, the one where we are having less and less adult experience these days is the Outdoor. I've seen folks come to an overnighter at Scout Camp with seemingly 100lbs of gear. Certainly, a couple of Dads'n'lads needed two wagonloads to bring their stuff to a tentsite that had a tent, a platform and two cots set. We don't know how to cook on a charcoal fire, let alone wood or propane, many of our adults struggle pitching a tent, they're cold at 40F... The Scout Oath may say nothing about outdoorsmanship, but that's the programmatic vehicle we use, and we darn well ought to be good users of our primary tool." Let me try to "send" again: "That is not to say that there is anything wrong with wanting more outdoors skills instruction for Scouts and Scouters. A course to follow-up on IOLS would be good. Do it. My Council will be offering such a course." . . . "No argument from me about the centrality of the Outdoor Program to Boy Scouting and Venturing. But Wood Badge is now for Cubbing leaders as well, and the outdoors does not seem as central to Varsity Scouting. In any case, there is an identification here of a void in training that is not being filed by the offerings at Philmont. That need can be filled by Districts and Councils. Some are already addressing the need. We can all be champions for advanced outdoor skills training wherever we are." "Catch"? Lacking the authority or influence to change the WB syllabus back to what it was before 2001 -- or before 1972 -- what should we do? Complain more OR staff IOLS and work hard for advanced outdoor leader skills training in our Councils and Districts? I'm am not worried about what "they" will do so much as what "we" will do. Leaders lead.

The SteriPEN is next to the text for "Filtering" and the tablets are next to the text for "Treating." I'm not sure they know what a SteriPEN is. Not that I'm a great fan of that method. It's delicate and not waterproof (Think kids.), a battery hog, and won't work under freezing. Other BSA literature treats the subject both more accurately and less accurately. Sigh!(This message has been edited by TAHAWK)