2025 z133

[pcpTR33]

in a draft back in marchish? There was discussion of chainsaw protection being required all the time not just on the ground, I think that drew heavy criticism from the monetary aspect.

 

[RyanCafferky]

in a draft back in marchish? There was discussion of chainsaw protection being required all the time not just on the ground, I think that drew heavy criticism from the monetary aspect.

I’ll comply with that for 1/2-3/4 of the year.

 

[pcpTR33]

I’ll comply with that for 1/2-3/4 of the year.

I shared the same opinion, all the fancy vented pants are great but still when it’s above 70 or good and humid hot is hot and to me the risk of heat stroke or heat related issues outweighs the benefits of protection in the tree.

 

[Steve Connally]

The fun one is mandatory two hands on ANYTHING with a chain. That ought to get some heated discussion

I don't even discuss that with people anymore. It's like discussing anything that involves the word "never". I just don't bother.

 

[evo]

I don't even discuss that with people anymore. It's like discussing anything that involves the word "never". I just don't bother.

Granted I posted that in partial jest, but sure we all SHOULD aim for perfection. Obviously sometimes the rules don’t make sense.

One thing that bugs me is being tied in twice ALWAYS, thinking of a crown reduction and making cuts way out on the tips. Many times all the work is way out and away from the climbing line and IF that line were to be cut no way that whatever one’s lanyard is around will hold body weight.
Sure there are practical work arounds but these can be quite cumbersome. Still I’m not advocating for only being tied on once, and will almost always tie in twice

 

[pcpTR33]

Granted I posted that in partial jest, but sure we all SHOULD aim for perfection. Obviously sometimes the rules don’t make sense.

One thing that bugs me is being tied in twice ALWAYS, thinking of a crown reduction and making cuts way out on the tips. Many times all the work is way out and away from the climbing line and IF that line were to be cut no way that whatever one’s lanyard is around will hold body weight.
Sure there are practical work arounds but these can be quite cumbersome. Still I’m not advocating for only being tied on once, and will almost always tie in twice

another place that I constantly see is spar work, guys just are essentially double lanyard’d when there’s so many easy options to have an actual descendable tie in which A makes life easier and neater, and B allows for a better chance at successful rescue should something occur.

 

[evo]

another place that I constantly see is spar work, guys just are essentially double lanyard’d when there’s so many easy options to have an actual descendable tie in which A makes life easier and neater, and B allows for a better chance at successful rescue should something occur.

I believe this is specifically addressed in this version.

 

[ATH]

I believe this is specifically addressed in this version.

My understanding is it says 2 tie in points and one must be a climbing line (I'm assuming climbing line is defined in the back?). Without looking, I thought the previous was 2 tie in points and one must be able to reach the ground? Seems like the difference is semantics, but maybe I'm missing something ... or maybe its to discourage 2 lanyard adjusters being used as lanyard adjuster state they are not to be used for primary climbing?

 

[evo]

My understanding is it says 2 tie in points and one must be a climbing line (I'm assuming climbing line is defined in the back?). Without looking, I thought the previous was 2 tie in points and one must be able to reach the ground? Seems like the difference is semantics, but maybe I'm missing something ... or maybe its to discourage 2 lanyard adjusters being used as lanyard adjuster state they are not to be used for primary climbing?

I believe you are correct. I think the verbiage change is clarification, refinement and making it more black and white to the reader.