So.. Free Climbing?

I've been in trees that, even at my age, I know I could free climb 2/3 of the way up. Still, I don't do it. A loop runner and a lanyard about 12' long, in single leg (SRT) mode, is a hell of a lot safer. Just wrap the stem above a branch, and raise it before you climb past it, and you can free climb with a reasonable failsafe. I honestly can't remember ever being in a situation where I couldn't do this.

It does seem odd that they would even talk about this in a training manual.

When I was 12 or 13 we had four Douglas Fir trees in the neighbor's backyard that I often climbed. Coming back down one afternoon, I had a limb snap off like a carrot and I fell about 15 or 20 feet through the canopy before stopping on a 3" branch. I can tell you that it hurt... I think hitting the ground in a free fall would have been less painful. I looked like somebody beat me with a ball bat. But, I wasn't seriously hurt, and I went to school the following day. I honestly don't think I'd survive that, today. It's not kids that are climbing trees for a living, so I'm thinking this is a bad idea all around.
 
Serf Life said:
I love free climbing for fun, but not for work. My brother took a 30'+ fall alone in the woods 6(?) Yrs ago and broke his back and neck. He was super lucky with the med team in Springfield, MA and is fully functional. Being dumb and not aware of surroundings will bite you with or without ropes or ppe. I still think ladders are more hazardous than free climbing a structurally sound tree though.
Click to expand...
I would probably concur on the ladder vs free climb point.
 
Question: If you go back and read the quoted section of the Forest Service Guide in post #2, on free climbing, and were to follow those instructions, precisely, how many of you feel you could not accomplish it, safely?
 
Last edited:
The writers of the guide could have easily just left out that whole section, but in doing so would have been negligent, in my opinion.

Like I said, it is a very well-written and carefully worded guide that is not in anyway meant for arborist use.
 
All kids should be taught the 3-points of connection to a tree rule, ie: two hands/one foot or two feet/one hand always. Then there's the crook of the wrist, the crook of the elbow and the armpit connection, all strong. For legs there's the back of the knee and the toe or foot hook.

Strong free climbing skills make a better rope and harness climber. Free climbing is not for work climbing but a strong climber uses all the above skills when they're on rope. I call it "scramble climbing", when you need to get there, backed by rope or lanyard but utilizing free climbing moves.

Stating the obvious but needs to be said.
-AJ
 
DSMc said:
Question: If you go back and read the quoted section of the Forest Service Guide in post #2, on free climbing, and were to follow those instructions, precisely, how many of you feel you could not accomplish it, safely?
Click to expand...
To me, safety means reliable security when you think you don’t need it. Imagine yourself free climbing, and both arms cramp up to the point of being useless. Or if you faint from sudden onset heat exhaustion, or if you just fucking slip, just that one time. You’re going to wish you had a lifeline on.
Fall protection needs to be 100.0% reliable, even if we think our bodies are 99.999% reliable.
 
DSMc said:
When you go up and down stairs, do you hold onto the hand rail or do you tie in?
Grabbing on to something is an excepted form of fall protection used around the world, cause it works.
Click to expand...
Right on bro. So Z133, OSHA, and all the insurance companies in the world that have invested copious amounts of money researching the subject are all idiots then.
I think it was mentioned here earlier - was it 12 feet? Above 12 feet and almost everyone agrees hand holding is not acceptable fall protection.
I don't know about you, but where I go my jobs are taller than 12 feet. And if they weren't, sure, I'd free climb em all!
 
Last edited:
samsquatch said:
... So Z133, OSHA, and all the insurance companies in the world that have invested copious amounts of money researching the subject are all idiots then...
Click to expand...

I would caution you about implying thoughts to me, or anyone else for that matter, that go beyond what has been said.

The Z133 is a well thought out guide for our industry. I believe that the Forest Service climbers guide is also well written. So how do I rectify the incongruities within each?

Critical thinking, which by the way is your greatest tool in the quest for coming home every day, says that many questions will have more than one correct answer. Do yourself a favor and think about how often that is true.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom