Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD

Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

"shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees;"

So... That method, would it be classified as a "recognized hazard"?
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

[ QUOTE ]
So... That method, would it be classified as a "recognized hazard"?

[/ QUOTE ]

That all depends on who is interpreting the accident.

To me, yes, the method is a recognized hazard and has been for many years.
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

Good link Tom. It is the employers responsibility (part a of the clause) as it is ours (part b) to work safely. This technique is known to have caused death or injury and thus should not be condoned by the employer. An employer who just leaves it up to his employees is setting themselves up for a huge liability. As the employer the buck stops with you.
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

[ QUOTE ]
...As the employer the buck stops with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I've thought too.

As an employer, I put myself under that same expectation.
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

The technique itself isn't bad if he'd had a lanyard around the tree and spiked back down putting 10% body weight on his spikes. It's more that he wasn't tied in twice that caused the accident.
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

A real shame to see someone young and just starting toward a family ending up dead. We did a lot of things back in the late '70s and early to mid '80s that make me cringe now.
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...As the employer the buck stops with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I've thought too.

As an employer, I put myself under that same expectation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another way to look at it is, do you want to have to explain to your employee's spouse, children, parents, etc... why they aren't coming home?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Terrible accident. My sympathies to his family and friends. Totally avoidable with even the most basic spar removal training. The fact that the owner is quoted as calling it ironic because the climber had done it hundreds of times before speaks to his ignorance of what is safe and unsafe.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds a little harsh... never the less it is true..

I knew a climber that broke his back doing pretty much the same thing.. heard the story first hand.. he ran the rope over some kind of bulge or knob on a pine and came down using spikes and a lanyard.. finally decided it was safe to use the line, unclipped the lanyard, gave two little tugs on the knot and he was free falling..

Friction savers!!!! Big Jon used to run a munter on the pull line.. fast and easy though not my preference..
 
This is a tragic story. But an excellent thread which shows the extreme value of the knowledge and experience available on the Buzz, and the worth of the Awakenings section.

But I have to ask, is there Anyone out there who can explain how the rope could come out of that notch?????

I don't use the technique but given that it has serious safety issues possibly suggests that other similar techniques (e.g. tying in around the main stem using a cut stub as the TIP) have safety issues too that aren't widely known??
 
[ QUOTE ]
This is a tragic story. But an excellent thread which shows the extreme value of the knowledge and experience available on the Buzz, and the worth of the Awakenings section.

But I have to ask, is there Anyone out there who can explain how the rope could come out of that notch?????

I don't use the technique but given that it has serious safety issues possibly suggests that other similar techniques (e.g. tying in around the main stem using a cut stub as the TIP) have safety issues too that aren't widely known??

[/ QUOTE ]

The force exerted on the point of contact has two components one vertical, downward on the stem and a lateral force acting perpendicular to the stem or against the side of the notch. That is the point of failure. Think of it like a car in a turn, if the force pushing the car sideways exceeds the tires grip on the road then the car goes into a slide.

loadforcesofdecendingclimber.png


As for stubs the same thing applies but it's the downward force that gives the potential for failure.

It's more complex than just this since the rope is also in motion, the load isn't constant (if you're rappelling then the force is reduced as you go into a free fall for an instant), the notch, or stub shape, species, etc...
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

Damn, that sucks.

I've used that technique a few times when I had to but a cambium saver is soooo much safer. I'd rather rapp on the pulling rope than do it again now.
 
treehumper,

AWESOME EXPLANATION!

I don't know if you just repeated someone or if they are your own words; i don't care, I haven't seen it explained that way and it makes a lot of sense.

thank you for your post!
 
Thanks! I thought that up myself with some help from my college mechanics/physics classes and vector analysis in math way back in my youth. That is some good learning that helps loads in this biz!
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

[ QUOTE ]
The technique itself isn't bad if he'd had a lanyard around the tree and spiked back down putting 10% body weight on his spikes. It's more that he wasn't tied in twice that caused the accident.

[/ QUOTE ]

True.
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

Employers are responsible because they are the one that profit from the work. In the past shortcuts were taken and worker's welfare was a distant concern for employers since it cut into profits. Only by holding employers responsible did the number of death and injury start to decline and the workplace become safe.

We take for granted what is today. It took many many deaths and horrific accidents to get here.

What I still don't get is how many employers are so adamant about NOT enforcing safety.

Ultimately, as in this case, employers can't plead ignorance to escape accountability.
 
Re: Climber killled in Eastern Shore of MD, OBIT

[ QUOTE ]
Employers are responsible because they are the one that profit from the work. In the past shortcuts were taken and worker's welfare was a distant concern for employers since it cut into profits. Only by holding employers responsible did the number of death and injury start to decline and the workplace become safe.

We take for granted what is today. It took many many deaths and horrific accidents to get here.

What I still don't get is how many employers are so adamant about NOT enforcing safety.

Ultimately, as in this case, employers can't plead ignorance to escape accountability.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree more. People wonder why unions? The above is why.
 
[ QUOTE ]


The force exerted on the point of contact has two components one vertical, downward on the stem and a lateral force acting perpendicular to the stem or against the side of the notch. That is the point of failure. Think of it like a car in a turn, if the force pushing the car sideways exceeds the tires grip on the road then the car goes into a slide.

loadforcesofdecendingclimber.png


As for stubs the same thing applies but it's the downward force that gives the potential for failure.

It's more complex than just this since the rope is also in motion, the load isn't constant (if you're rappelling then the force is reduced as you go into a free fall for an instant), the notch, or stub shape, species, etc...

[/ QUOTE ]

...and other factors, too. The top notch holding the rope in place is all about the notch holding the side of the climbing rope that is being fed into it as the climber lowers. If an irregular shape on the trunk.....a 'whip' in the rope, etc. results in the feeding rope coming out of rope input side of the notch...the climber falls.
 
This technique looks like something right outta the stone ages of arborculture. Ultimatly it is the employers responsibility to provide proper traing and equipment to their employees (IE the use of an adjustable friction saver) It's also the employers responsibility to enforce a safe work enviroment. This being said none of us need ansi and osha babysitters so ultimatly it is up to us to make sure we make it home safe!
 
The employer sets the tone for the workplace by establishing the rules and standards by which the company operates since it's their business. If they allow the employees do that without overseeing them then they are in for a world of hurt.

As the employer you are the leader of the pack and with that comes all the responsibility for it's behavior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom