Aerial rescues with basal anchors? Anybody actually know of one done?

Phil

Phil

Carpal tunnel level member
Location
Oak Lawn, IL
Anybody have experience employing a lowerable basal anchor for a real rescue? I just watched another YouTube channel that showcased various basal anchors for SRS configurations. Lots of neat ideas and useful concepts. At the heart of basal anchor discussion is the notion that it makes the climber lowerable from the ground. Ok great. I get it. Can anybody share an actual account of an aerial rescue performed with a lowerable basal anchor?

I think back to MRS systems not having this ability and no one really lost sleep over it. A lowerable basal tie off also only works if the climber isn't lanyarded or jammed in a union as well. I'm not discounting it's benefit, I'm just wondering if anyone has had to perform an actual honest to god aerial rescue employing a lowerable basal anchor. I've never heard of this actually happening so was hoping to get some first hand feedback on how it worked in reality. By that I mean, think of the throwline. It's this amazing tool that works really well everytime on paper but when actually used, has its fair share of frustrating issues.
 
evo said:
Only one I know of was the climber in New York Central Park. She was attacked by hornets, and the ground crew decided to lower her, but dropped her and broke her back
Click to expand...
Ummm....that's pretty f'd up. Got a link to anything regarding that?
 
To me the idea of a lowerable basal anchor is absurd. The three most likely scenarios that I can think to occur are:

1. I'm conscious and I'll get myself down.
2. I'm unconscious and lanyard in, so I'm not coming down.
3. I'm unconscious and not lanyard in, but you'll probably get me hung up or bounce me off a few limbs trying to get me down.
 
Most of the folks I've ever worked with weren't proficient with climbing systems and most of them had never even climbed. I have never felt comfortable putting my life in their hands. By the time you train someone they move on and it's a never ending cycle. It may bite me in the butt someday but I try real hard not to do anything that will require someone else to be in control of me.
 
I'm a big fan of the improvements in technique and safety that have been made over the last decade or so in this industry, and a lowerable basal anchor is part of that trend. That said, in the ten years I've been doing this work I've never personally heard of it happening, or even heard any of the 'youtube tree guys' do it either. If you have a competent ground guy who can handle such a task (and yes, this may include climbing up and unclipping a lanyard as some have pointed out) that's great but let's be honest, it's very rare. Your best bet is probably having another competent tree service with skilled climbers on speed-dial.
 
Last edited:
I'm with boom, When is a ground lower able system going to come into play? The two main ways I can see a climber requiring rescue is either a chainsaw accident (should be lanyard in) or some sort of crushing event from rigging (tripped by the climber using a chainsaw, who is suppose to be tied in twice). So in-order for a ground based lowering system to be effective the climber must detach their secondary, or a rescue climber must ascend.
The ground system can help in a rescue, where the crew sends someone up and there is no change over and the victim is lowered on their own system.
This is how pragmatic I see it, and Im fine with a running bowline. However I still tie a alpine butterfly just uphill of it for a lowering system to easily clip into. If another arb comes after me, they will want to use what they are familiar with. If the FD comes, they have their own criteria...
 
Benjo75 said:

Women Arborist Injured at New York Botanical garden?

Has anyone heard of the women who while ascending SRT was stung by hornets and passed out from shock? Apparently her ground crew wasnt able to lower her due to lack of system knowledge. They ended up dropping her another 20 feet and she was severely injured in the fall. this is all second hand...
www.treebuzz.com
Click to expand...

That was a very informational thread to read. Thanks for digging that out. That's exactly what I meant when I said something works great on paper and then not so great in application. So many variables. I feel like this industry is kind of a double edged sword with regulations and standards. We use a defined set criteria for quality and strength of gear, define certain techniques like being tied in twice when chainsawing etc. but then I see things like 50 different configurations for basal anchors. There is no standard uniformity, which I like because it gives me the freedom to problem solve and get creative...but I also don't like because there is no standard to point to. I can't pick up an arboriculture climbing manual and read about the 4 or 5 acceptable forms of basal anchors. I have to get on youtube and discussion forums to vet out whats what. For me, I always operate on the Keep It Simple Stupid principle for stuff like this.

One of the big things that I took away from that thread which I haven't really given much thought to before was the concept that when employing a lowerable basal anchor to rescue someone, never cut the climbers rope or at least avoid it if at all possible.
 
evo said:
I'm with boom, When is a ground lower able system going to come into play? The two main ways I can see a climber requiring rescue is either a chainsaw accident (should be lanyard in) or some sort of crushing event from rigging (tripped by the climber using a chainsaw, who is suppose to be tied in twice). So in-order for a ground based lowering system to be effective the climber must detach their secondary, or a rescue climber must ascend.
The ground system can help in a rescue, where the crew sends someone up and there is no change over and the victim is lowered on their own system.
This is how pragmatic I see it, and Im fine with a running bowline. However I still tie a alpine butterfly just uphill of it for a lowering system to easily clip into. If another arb comes after me, they will want to use what they are familiar with. If the FD comes, they have their own criteria...
Click to expand...
To piggyback, the thought I had while reading you and boomslang- the people MOST likely to NOT be lanyarded in while cutting are LEAST likely to be using or care to use a lowerable system.
 
If any of you know Brick Reilly (Works in Millburn, NJ) he posted a very good Facebook video of a method he uses. Does require another "climber" or at least saddle proficient user on ground. Check him out, it's his to offer, not mine, but I'm thinking about employing it. Sure someone here knows him, he might be here as well.

When I began SRT for ascending only long time ago, system was far too difficult to self rescue or descend, so we just used plenty of rope and a portawrap or grigri. Not a bad system, minus all the rope needed. This was "tree frog" system and such, 15 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Jonny said:
Thanks for posting that, Ben.
Post 7 in that thread she tells what happened.
I use a basal anchor a lot, out of convenience rather than possibly needing to be lowered. I better be unconscious if someone fucks with it.
Click to expand...
And they better know how to fucking use it before I'm unconcious
 
The lower end of my anchor line is a fisherman's bend on a bight with a large thimble that my basal anchor is hooked through. There's plenty of room to attach a rescue line before removing the basal anchor.

Unfortunately, I'm usually on the lanyard unless I'm actually climbing or descending, and I always tie in before using my saw. I don't see much chance of an easy rescue unless I'm suddenly incapacitated while on the move. And then there's the issue of rarely having anyone around when I climb.
 
I stopped calling them lowerable anchors a few years ago. The name is just not accurate for all the reasons and more mentioned above. “Rescuable” anchors are a myth. Arborists are not doing the majority of the rescues.

Training a climber in a new technique, testing a new system? Perhaps, but that is not production based.

I refer to them now as adjustable. There is benefit in having the ability to add and/ or remove rope from a system at times.

Define your terms.

Tony
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom