Atlanta Tree Worker Killed

[RyTheTreeGuy]

Just curious, what is an approved assent system within those guidelines? Is the cammed ascender restrictions only for life support, so you could still use a knee and foot ascender?

Our approved method is sit/stand with prusiks. I woukd have to look at the exact wording from the NFPA, but I believe you are correct in stating restricted to life support. I am unsure about whether the "life support" refers to the life lines between the ground and progress capture because we are allowed to use cammed rope grabs in our haul systems.

I am not certified in Aerial Rescue for tree work but this has me thinking. Would it be prudent to make it a standard in Arboriculture to always have an access line set and available? Even though the fire departments ascending methods are slower then a rope walking system it is still much faster then 2 hrs...I have never set a dedicated access line for say, but it seems like I may be in the future.

 

[Serf Life]

@colb I can appreciate your frustration with the 2hr delay in this story and agree that more training is needed, probably with all rescues. Re-read Rusty's post on the amount of time their dept has for training and realize they are probably way ahead of most FDs. You can't expect every dept to have all of the skills.

 

[Steve Connally]

Just curious, what is an approved assent system within those guidelines? Is the cammed ascender restrictions only for life support, so you could still use a knee and foot ascender?

I have to respectfully disagree with you and would like you to site the NFPA standard that prohibits use of camel ascenders. I've been doing tech rescue for 25 years and cammed ascenders are still a staple of the cache. You cannot use toothed cams as a lock off for a haul or lowering system. They are acceptable for lead climbing and ascension. Not picking a fight but you are totally incorrect.

 

[Jehinten]

I have to respectfully disagree with you and would like you to site the NFPA standard that prohibits use of camel ascenders. I've been doing tech rescue for 25 years and cammed ascenders are still a staple of the cache. You cannot use toothed cams as a lock off for a haul or lowering system. They are acceptable for lead climbing and ascension. Not picking a fight but you are totally incorrect.

@RyTheTreeGuy

Just getting this response to the right guy I have no knowledge of NFPA standards when it comes to aerial rescue.

 

[Scottyrunner100]

Just curious, what is an approved assent system within those guidelines? Is the cammed ascender restrictions only for life support, so you could still use a knee and foot ascender?

The basic accent/decent taught at the Rope Technician level is similar to caving. Advance using a chest prusik and a set of purcell prusiks (foot loops), then perform a changeover to a rescue rack.
Many departments have Petzl I'D's or similar devices to add the ability to climb using RADS.
Members of the team I am with were sent to SPRAT, so that has opened up that style of climbing as an option.
Like another Buzzer mentioned, TRT teams train on lots of TRT specific tasks (rope rescue, vehicle extrication, confined space, trench, structural collapse, swiftwater rescue, helo, and aerial treetop rescue) along with Medical EMT/Paramedic and FireFighting. Climbers who read the Buzz are very familiar with the advancements made for Tree climbing over the years, the same is true for many of the other tasks a TRT team is responsible for. Staying up to date and learning, and being open to learn new things takes time.

 

[Steve Connally]

The entire point everyone is making is exactly the same and well said so many times over. Make a connection with those who will be coming to get you. Start a dialogue and move on to training together. If nothing else, set them a block or a friction saver from the ground so they can access the tree when they arrive. Thats the hold up. They know what to do when they have access, but the access is out of the box for them. Teach them about hazard surveys, wood strengths, strong branch unions, preclimb inspections. Help convince them something other than steel and concrete can be bombproof. You can do it, just understand where they are coming from and their hesitation to step out of the box.

 

[Steve Connally]

@RyTheTreeGuy

Just getting this response to the right guy I have no knowledge of NFPA standards when it comes to aerial rescue.

OOPS sorry

 

[RyTheTreeGuy]

I have to respectfully disagree with you and would like you to site the NFPA standard that prohibits use of camel ascenders. I've been doing tech rescue for 25 years and cammed ascenders are still a staple of the cache. You cannot use toothed cams as a lock off for a haul or lowering system. They are acceptable for lead climbing and ascension. Not picking a fight but you are totally incorrect.

My apologies then, as stated I would have to read through, I am going off of heresay from instructors and training officers.

 

[Scottyrunner100]

Given the wild and unacknowledged contradictions in the news article, it is possible that the 2 hour time was also not accurate...[/QUOTE]

I have only seen what the video shows and have not spoken with anyone on the scene of this incident. I agree with Colb that the time of 2 hours is possibly misleading.
I can only relate it to the incident the team I am with responded to recently. The total time was 45 minutes...but that was the time from the 1st arriving unit which was an Engine crew without TRT capabilities until the rescuer was on the ground. The rescuer stayed in the tree an additional 10 minutes (give or take) while the tree worker was being cared for below and to remove the rigging before decending.

 

[Steve Connally]

My apologies then, as stated I would have to read through, I am going off of heresay from instructors and training officers.

Not singling you out at all but there are 2 schools of thought in the tech rescue community. There are the big fish in the little pond and the true pros. Even in my neck of the woods there are the guys who swear their specific training manual are gospel. They won't go outside the confines of the program because it isn't written in the book. The lack the ability to research and break through the norms to set new standards. They have achieved respect and inbred subject matter expert status through regurgitation of the one resource they have to learn from. The may be super good in their little bubble but challenge them outside their knowledge base and they will tell you a lot of "you can't because".

Then there are the pros, the guys changing the face of tech rescue. Outside the box guys who still operate within the standards and the gear design limits but get stuff done. Look at guys like Reed Thorne. Did NFPA ever tell him he can't load share off a cliff on a bunch of different bushes to save a life? No way. It doesn't get that specific, ever. I remember when the Petzl ID came out. Our guru's told us we had to back it up with 2 triple wrap prussic just incase it failed. I told them they were idiots and wouldn't do it. I got a bunch of guff from that but a year later one of these guys heard from another guy who heard from another guy so and so said it was ok to use without a back up. Thats how it works a lot of the time.

So the point being, when you are told you can't, look it up, chances are they are full of crap and its an excuse. Any tech team who says they aren't allowed to do a tree rescue is either not willing to or prohibited by their administration. Either was its an excuse.

 

[RyTheTreeGuy]

My apologies then, as stated I would have to read through, I am going off of heresay from instructors and training officers.

Also wou

Not singling you out at all but there are 2 schools of thought in the tech rescue community. There are the big fish in the little pond and the true pros. Even in my neck of the woods there are the guys who swear their specific training manual are gospel. They won't go outside the confines of the program because it isn't written in the book. The lack the ability to research and break through the norms to set new standards. They have achieved respect and inbred subject matter expert status through regurgitation of the one resource they have to learn from. The may be super good in their little bubble but challenge them outside their knowledge base and they will tell you a lot of "you can't because".

Then there are the pros, the guys changing the face of tech rescue. Outside the box guys who still operate within the standards and the gear design limits but get stuff done. Look at guys like Reed Thorne. Did NFPA ever tell him he can't load share off a cliff on a bunch of different bushes to save a life? No way. It doesn't get that specific, ever. I remember when the Petzl ID came out. Our guru's told us we had to back it up with 2 triple wrap prussic just incase it failed. I told them they were idiots and wouldn't do it. I got a bunch of guff from that but a year later one of these guys heard from another guy who heard from another guy so and so said it was ok to use without a back up. Thats how it works a lot of the time.

So the point being, when you are told you can't, look it up, chances are they are full of crap and its an excuse. Any tech team who says they aren't allowed to do a tree rescue is either not willing to or prohibited by their administration. Either was its an excuse.

I agree with you whole heartedly. There are many days that myself and other firefighters have been left extremely frustrated because of all the "red tape" and what ifs of people (administration) who don't fully understand the subject and equipment. It can also be frustrating if you have experience in another field and you know there are better ways to accomplish the same goals just as safely....sorry just frustrated. I was involved in a situation where we worked "outside of the box" and actually saved a life but were later chastised for our methods and called "cowboys." I appreciate your opinions, knowledge and experience. If I lived closer to you I would be attending your course(s) for sure.

 

[Scottyrunner100]

I would just like to add that a rescue of this type is very different for a TRT team than for a climber at a comp.
At the comp usually the access line is pre-installed, you are geared up and just have to step foot into the ring. The base of the tree and the tree itself has been cleared of debris. There's the luxury of watching others and formulating a plan of what worked and what didn't. Etc.

For the TRT team they may arrive not knowing what exactly they have to deal with. Is it a spar rescue? A canopy rescue? Is it a tree worker with a harness at least, or is it a skydiver, a person trying to retrieve their drone or cat, or it could be someone under the influence or suffering from a medical condition that decided to climb a tree and now cannot get down.

Then the scene most likely will not be easily accessed. Usually its in the back yard, in our case uphill in the front yard and then downhill on the backside. Equipment has to be carried.

The base of the tree could be cluttered with limbs that has been cut like they were in our case, making it difficult to install lines and even see or communicate with other TRT crew.
The dangers that most comps simulate or at least is verbally mentioned can be a real concern.

And it could be dark, which was the case for us. Although the non TRT crews did a great job at our incident getting lighting set up.

A comp rescue can be stressful, but a life is not actually on the line. Add in possibly the victim and or bystanders screaming at you to do something while you are trying to do so with all of the above obstacles and other things unexpectedly thrown in.

Having said all that I will not say anything negative about the reported 2 hours. To many unknowns of the situation and what had to be dealt with and if that time is accurate and what the time includes.
Is that from the time the call came in, was the call located for a long response time for the TRT team, was it at peak traffic times or other delays present (RR crossing delay), was the time stopped the minute the victim reached the ground or did it include going in service from the call.

 

[Tony]

Having said all that I will not say anything negative about the reported 2 hours. To many unknowns of the situation and what had to be dealt with and if that time is accurate and what the time includes.
Is that from the time the call came in, was the call located for a long response time for the TRT team, was it at peak traffic times or other delays present (RR crossing delay), was the time stopped the minute the victim reached the ground or did it include going in service from the call.

Well said and it does not matter.
What ever the time the only thing that makes a tragic situation like this worse is when someone trying to help becomes a second victim.
There are no easy solutions and the conversation spurned is valuable. The best investment in time would have been for the climber to practice “aerial rescue avoidance.”

Practicing for emergency has value. Practicing not to be one has more.

Tony

 

[DSMc]

I am a bit surprised at how little spur climbing is discussed in real world rescue scenarios. It is easy to teach, it has a low cost, short list for gear and it is fast. The USFS has a great training program and manual that would set a precedent for federal approval. https://www.fs.fed.us/treeclimbing/

 

[Scottyrunner100]

I am a bit surprised at how little spur climbing is discussed in real world rescue scenarios. It is easy to teach, it has a low cost, short list for gear and it is fast. The USFS has a great training program and manual that would set a precedent for federal approval. https://www.fs.fed.us/treeclimbing/

The training Oldoakman mentioned included practicing rescues on spurs. Most of the departments that were at the training had spurs for their department.
The Georgia Arborist Association donated equipment, including spurs to any department that did not have the equipment.

 

[rustykfd]

In my area spurs at a fire department would be very unusual. Working/training from ropes(for High Angle) is very common.

 

[DSMc]

The safety of rope work is dependent on the setting and use of a solid anchor. This is not something that is easily or quickly taught and accomplished when dealing with trees. Spurs and two fliplines are a solid, quickly taught tree access tool that covers many if not most of what would be needed in tree rescue situations. This tree specific component would compliment the already ingrained high angle rope work techniques of their base training.

 

[Steve Connally]

Also wou


I agree with you whole heartedly. There are many days that myself and other firefighters have been left extremely frustrated because of all the "red tape" and what ifs of people (administration) who don't fully understand the subject and equipment. It can also be frustrating if you have experience in another field and you know there are better ways to accomplish the same goals just as safely....sorry just frustrated. I was involved in a situation where we worked "outside of the box" and actually saved a life but were later chastised for our methods and called "cowboys." I appreciate your opinions, knowledge and experience. If I lived closer to you I would be attending your course(s) for sure.

Fingers crossed i'll be presenting on this at expo this year.

 

[Steve Connally]

I would just like to add that a rescue of this type is very different for a TRT team than for a climber at a comp.
At the comp usually the access line is pre-installed, you are geared up and just have to step foot into the ring. The base of the tree and the tree itself has been cleared of debris. There's the luxury of watching others and formulating a plan of what worked and what didn't. Etc.

For the TRT team they may arrive not knowing what exactly they have to deal with. Is it a spar rescue? A canopy rescue? Is it a tree worker with a harness at least, or is it a skydiver, a person trying to retrieve their drone or cat, or it could be someone under the influence or suffering from a medical condition that decided to climb a tree and now cannot get down.

Then the scene most likely will not be easily accessed. Usually its in the back yard, in our case uphill in the front yard and then downhill on the backside. Equipment has to be carried.

The base of the tree could be cluttered with limbs that has been cut like they were in our case, making it difficult to install lines and even see or communicate with other TRT crew.
The dangers that most comps simulate or at least is verbally mentioned can be a real concern.

And it could be dark, which was the case for us. Although the non TRT crews did a great job at our incident getting lighting set up.

A comp rescue can be stressful, but a life is not actually on the line. Add in possibly the victim and or bystanders screaming at you to do something while you are trying to do so with all of the above obstacles and other things unexpectedly thrown in.

Having said all that I will not say anything negative about the reported 2 hours. To many unknowns of the situation and what had to be dealt with and if that time is accurate and what the time includes.
Is that from the time the call came in, was the call located for a long response time for the TRT team, was it at peak traffic times or other delays present (RR crossing delay), was the time stopped the minute the victim reached the ground or did it include going in service from the call.

The basis of one of my programs for AR is out of all the AR classes taught in our industry, the majority of them are a solid repeat of a comp AR scenario. Get up , get them down. Who actually teaches field care, spinal protection, preparation for 911's arrival on when NOT to rescue? Not many

 

[Steve Connally]

The safety of rope work is dependent on the setting and use of a solid anchor. This is not something that is easily or quickly taught and accomplished when dealing with trees. Spurs and two fliplines are a solid, quickly taught tree access tool that covers many if not most of what would be needed in tree rescue situations. This tree specific component would compliment the already ingrained high angle rope work techniques of their base training.

Agreed. We started with spur climbing and big shot practice. Even just to set a line natural crotch for a belay of the inexperienced rescuer. All it took was one call to the city forrester and he gave us several trees slated for removal in a city park we could use. Naturally we set a belay in every tree for the guys climbing. FD never works without a lifeline for belay so this kept them happy and the powers at be approved reluctantly