Workable alternative to U.K. two climbing systems

[scotspine1]

21 hours ago, EdwardC said:

I've worked in arboriculture for over 40 years, 25 as a climber starting in 1979. I've known two people who fell from height, none who had to be rescued or self-rescue. I would suggest if you're able to self-rescue you're able to manage your ropes, ergo, your bleed out argument falls at the first hurdle. If you couldn't manage your ropes then you're not self-rescuing and someone has to come and get you. And if those who fell because they had no stop-knot, or because they cut themselves out of a tree had had second lines they wouldn't have fallen, which is why the HSE are saying it's two rope working. And it's not being proposed it's right here right now and what you should be doing.

 

What is considered safe, or just normal practice,  changes through time. Back in the late seveties it was fairly normal to free climb the tree before tying in when you got to the top. Would anyone countenance that now. MEWPs were unheard of, but now are common place and used to avoid climbing wherever practical. It used to be the case that you wouldn't use a strop to aid work positioning as it reduced your ability to get out of the way if something bad was happening. Yet now it's considered good practice because it improves stability in the tree and, as you point out, helps prevent chainsaw injuries and deaths, invariably caused by the use of top-handled saws.

 

The Arb Assoc has many faults but you will be pleased to know that they were vocal in defence of top-handled saws when they were to be banned. Personally I'd say defending one of the biggest killers in arboriculture is defending the indefensible. But I never liked or used top-handled saws. I guess those who did like and use them and were killed by them would also take a different view now, as will their families and friends.

 

On a cheerier note, the AA worked hard so that full body harnesses weren't introduced for all tree work. So you can thank them for being able to use whatever sit harness you have.

 

The HSE will look at the figures and conclude that falls from height are the major problem in arb work, and stopping it their primary concern. They won't wait for a few millennia whilst Darwinian evolution takes place, they'll act now. Next up will be the next biggest cause of injuries and deaths. So it's back to the future and the banning of top-handled saws.

 

In 25 years time people will be wondering why two rope working wasn't always the way it was done, and why climbers were allowed to kill themselves on a regular basis with top-handled saws.

 

Quick glance through your previous posts on Arbtalk and as suspected you’re massively out of touch with climbing......

 

 

 

 

 

. 

[Rich Rule]

22 hours ago, EdwardC said:

 

Risk assessment is about reasonableness. It's not about assessing out every last little risk, that's impossible.

 

I've worked in arboriculture for over 40 years, 25 as a climber starting in 1979. I've known two people who fell from height, none who had to be rescued or self-rescue. I would suggest if you're able to self-rescue you're able to manage your ropes, ergo, your bleed out argument falls at the first hurdle. If you couldn't manage your ropes then you're not self-rescuing and someone has to come and get you. And if those who fell because they had no stop-knot, or because they cut themselves out of a tree had had second lines they wouldn't have fallen, which is why the HSE are saying it's two rope working. And it's not being proposed it's right here right now and what you should be doing.

 

What is considered safe, or just normal practice,  changes through time. Back in the late seveties it was fairly normal to free climb the tree before tying in when you got to the top. Would anyone countenance that now. MEWPs were unheard of, but now are common place and used to avoid climbing wherever practical. It used to be the case that you wouldn't use a strop to aid work positioning as it reduced your ability to get out of the way if something bad was happening. Yet now it's considered good practice because it improves stability in the tree and, as you point out, helps prevent chainsaw injuries and deaths, invariably caused by the use of top-handled saws.

 

The Arb Assoc has many faults but you will be pleased to know that they were vocal in defence of top-handled saws when they were to be banned. Personally I'd say defending one of the biggest killers in arboriculture is defending the indefensible. But I never liked or used top-handled saws. I guess those who did like and use them and were killed by them would also take a different view now, as will their families and friends.

 

On a cheerier note, the AA worked hard so that full body harnesses weren't introduced for all tree work. So you can thank them for being able to use whatever sit harness you have.

 

The HSE will look at the figures and conclude that falls from height are the major problem in arb work, and stopping it their primary concern. They won't wait for a few millennia whilst Darwinian evolution takes place, they'll act now. Next up will be the next biggest cause of injuries and deaths. So it's back to the future and the banning of top-handled saws.

 

In 25 years time people will be wondering why two rope working wasn't always the way it was done, and why climbers were allowed to kill themselves on a regular basis with top-handled saws.

Wow, are you for real mate?

 

So you never used a top handle in all your years of climbing...  ? 
 

As others have stated, I think you are a bit out of touch with climbing.

 

IMO the context of your argument was a load of Bollocks.

 

Please expand on how a top handle is  out to get you?

 

Mine are all ported and have timing advances, does that make them serial killers?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mick Dempsey]

I think Edward is bang on in most everything he says. 

 

I can understand why people don’t like it and attack him personally, but that’s no real counter argument.

Edited March 8, 2020 by Mick Dempsey

[Rich Rule]

So Mick do you think you top handles are out to get you?

 

I reread the post in question.  There are some valid points regarding some issues but top handles saws being killers?   I will stand by my statement, that is bollocks.

 

Education is key, using the right tool in the right scenario is very important as is the knowledge to use said tool safely.

 

Cars are deadly in the wrong hands, the same can be said about almost everything in life.

[Mick Dempsey]

Top handles are dangerous in that you can use them one handed.

 

If they were banned there would be less left forearm injuries and less people cutting their necks and shoulders, through kickback during one handed use.

 

I don't want them banned, though it wouldn’t really affect me tbh, but there’s a clear logic to it happening.

[Konstantly]

59 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

I think Edward is bang on in most everything he says. 

 

I can understand why people don’t like it and attack him personally, but that’s no real counter argument.

I would imagine the attack on him personally is simply because his post is his personal opinion.

As with everyone else who posts hear.. 

 

If someone disagrees with anything I post hear it will evoke a response or not.. I have conversations with people in person and have no issue in response in defence or admittance that I may be wrong or just a view point that expands my knowledge and changes my mind.

 

The nature of forums is to open points for discussion to broaden horizons and expand knowledge 

  If you have an opinion at the least have a counter to defend it? 

 

He has a few points worth considering but it is inevitable that ones that people disagree with are the ones picking up on.

I imagine he is a busy man so no time to respond at present. Or he may have just put out his opinions and has no interest in futher response.

Which ever is true he has given people something to think about..

[Konstantly]

3 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Top handles are dangerous in that you can use them one handed.

 

If they were banned there would be less left forearm injuries and less people cutting their necks and shoulders, through kickback during one handed use.

 

I don't want them banned, though it wouldn’t really affect me tbh, but there’s a clear logic to it happening.

I knew climbers 20 years ago who never used top handled saws.

 They used back handled saws one handed though! Sometimes a foot too! Go figure... safer than a top handled saws? I think not. Just stupidity.

 

Point it if you put a tool in the hands of an idiot they will find a way to make that tool dangerous....

[Mick Dempsey]

2 minutes ago, Konstantly said:

I would imagine the attack on him personally is simply because his post is his personal opinion.

 

I think it’s an attempt to invalidate his points by saying he doesn’t know what he’s talking about because he’s not a currently working climber.

[Rich Rule]

7 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Top handles are dangerous in that you can use them one

1 minute ago, Konstantly said:

I knew climbers 20 years ago who never used top handled saws.

 They used back handled saws one handed though! Sometimes a foot too! Go figure... safer than a top handled saws? I think not. Just stupidity.

 

Point it if you put a tool in the hands of an idiot they will find a way to make that tool dangerous....

I was just typing a similar response but then deleted it.

My first boss, used to laugh at how easy the younger climbers had it these days...  all the while holding out an 026 one handed without a wobble.

[Mick Dempsey]

5 minutes ago, Konstantly said:

I knew climbers 20 years ago who never used top handled saws.

 They used back handled saws one handed though! Sometimes a foot too! Go figure... safer than a top handled saws? I think not. Just stupidity.

 

Point it if you put a tool in the hands of an idiot they will find a way to make that tool dangerous....

It’s the same old nonsense about how anyone who has an accident through misuse is an idiot, and somehow deserves it.

 

Edited March 8, 2020 by Mick Dempsey