scotspine1

Abandon the sinking ship that is capitalism. Implement forced economic slow down, followed by de-growth - an incremental deconstruction of capitalism especially it's insidious requirement for mass immigration (cheap labour/new consumers). Global de-population programs. Current population forecast based on birthrate patterns for 2100 is 11 billion people - unsustainable - everyone knows this, only a fool would deny it. Capitalism is destroying the natural world and if we continue at current economic growth globally it will cause civilisational and ecological collapse and with it hardships beyond the imagination. If you think the Covid crisis is bad, wait for the resource wars and mass famines caused by ecological collapse. Anyone promoting the benefits of capitalism now is in complete denial of the grave situation the human race is facing in the near future. Capitalism only benefits the elite. An elite moving ever further away from the masses. .

No .

They fly these people in because they can. There is one rule for the capitalist elites and another rule for everyone else. They operate above the law. The people who run these companies are well connected to government, they decide to fly in 100s of 'skilled horticulturalists' from Romania or Bulgaria in the middle of a pandemic and just like that it happens, they get their cheap labour. The Left in their stupidity then jump in to defend the capitalist's use of migrant workers because the Left in Britain has been betraying the British working class since the 1960s. British people can pick strawberries, the problem is they want a decent wage for it and the capitalists dont like that, instead they want foreign migrant workers who will work for peanuts. .

'HMRC will contact you with an online form, they pay the grant straight to your bank account.'

HMRC will contact people it thinks are eligible based on SA tax returns it holds? Did I hear that right? .

Military convoy at Bergamo, Lombardy region, Italy. Taking dead bodies to be cremated. Not fake news. Posted on twitter by former minister of the interior Matteo Salvini.

Are you seriously telling us you’re going to a family gathering? People of all ages? How many? From a large area? .

With respect, the AA have no particular relevance from the moment you first meet a customer to that of when they write you a cheque and you say goodbye. .

The points he makes relating to climbing carry almost no weight because he’s not climbed as a full time climber since 2004. His thoughts on climbing now - in 2020 are just that - thoughts, formed in the abstract, attempting to draw on his climbing experience from 16 years ago where he undoubtedly climbed on a single line, yet now he pontificates in the merits of twin rope climbing. He attempted to lecture full time professional climbers and talk to them as if they were ignorant and unaware of critical aspects of the job they carry out on a daily basis. This is why people are justified in questioning his credibility. ,

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

If you want to climb on two ropes by all means do so but climbing on two ropes is not mandatory. You DO NOT need to do it. When you approach a job, if you assess the risk that climbing on two ropes could lead to an increased risk of an accident then you dont do it. This does not mean you fore-go the use of two ropes indefinitely. It just means you understand when it would be beneficial to use two ropes. An increased risk of climbing on two ropes is the unanswered problem of self rescue which the AA will not address because they know it's a huge problem if your two climbing lines become tangled beneath you on a self rescue descent. They are pushing a technique that could potentially see a climber bleed out amidst tangled lines. The proposed implemetation of two ropes by the HSE (and heavily pushed by the AA) was initiated as a kneejerk reaction to climbers falling off the end of their climbing lines and cutting themselves out of the tree, in these instances the victims were deviating from industry best practice (no stopper knots in end of lines and not being tied in twice when using the saw). If moving through the crown of a tree on a single rope was such a dangerous practice there would be 1000s of tree climbers dropping out of trees on a weekly basis worldwide. The proposed two rope implementation fiasco and it's accompanying hysteria will go down as a low point for the AA and the arboricultural industry in general. It showed the HSE have minimal understanding of our industry and that the AA was not willing to robustly defend our position. What made matters worse was that the AA attempted to delegitimise our safe work practices overnight. They deferred to the HSE with little resistance, behaving obsequiously to those in power. Do not let these people dictate how you manage your safety in the tree, it's your life on the line, not theirs. They sit in their warm offices reading accident stats thinking I need to justify my job and throw some regulations at this industry I know nothing about so I can be seen to be doing something. How could they possibly have the answers? The Arb industry is a grassroots movement, everything we've done related to climbing was innovated and developed from within from the ground up, borrowing some aspects from similar rope disciplines. It's not a top down bureaucracy. People not actively engaged in this work on a daily basis DO NOT get to dictate how we carry out our work. They can try, but now, with almost zero credibility....who in their right mind would listen to them. If twin rope ever becomes the norm in treework it'll be because it was innovated and developed from within to make the job easier or safer on our terms. Only we as climbers can fully appreciate the depth of infinite climbing situations and evolving work scenarios that require our mind to be as free as possible to be able to create imaginative solutions to the task at hand. .

Lived and worked as a climber in the states for some time (New York, Washington DC, Virginia, Maryland) great place, great people. Solid, trustworthy, dependable, hard working and all with a great sense of humour. Anyone from out-with America who dismisses it out of hand is doing so out of ignorance and stupidity. If you are American and you hate America you are a traitor to every American who lived before you who worked their fingers to the bone carving a life for them and their families out of a vast inhospitable wilderness. .

The British Establishment - elites, politicians, the police, the social services, the media and academia sanctioned this, they allowed it to happen Fears over race relations affected probe into child sex grooming gan… WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Dozens of teenage girls suspected of being groomed and abused in Manchester...

We have to talk about these Pakistani gangs WWW.SPIKED-ONLINE.COM The Manchester abuse scandal shows what a horrendous impact political... UK, Keep your children safe, the grooming gangs are free to do whatever they like without the law interfering. .

Multicar, Unimog, 4x4 Tipper, Arb Truck, Iveco 4x4 WWW.EBAY.CO.UK You are looking at a multicar 4x4 truck made in Germany. It has rear hydraulic...

PANO PIC WARNING - parts of this image are heavily distorted/blurred (rope + Ash), pic is for general outline of a scenario from yesterday.... Installed main line with cambium saver in the Ash from ground (top lead in Ash was split hence lateral used, it was solid) Could’ve used SRT/wrench with base tie also for this tree/anchor, but chose DdRT to be properly isolated around branch. Anyway - Proceeded to climb smaller leaning Alder with flipline and spikes - was tied in twice for the entire removal of the Alder. Mainline in Ash, flipline around Alder - Tied in twice. This twin line legislation now demands I put a full length second main line in the Ash or Alder. A 3rd system. Why? Don’t answer - it’s rhetorical. There is no logical or rational explanation for adding in a second full length climbing line in addition to the two systems already being used. Its an extreme and excessive measure to reduce risk so much so that it makes the job unworkable in a commercial setting. This is not a hobby, we don’t have all the time in the day to climb ourselves into a quandry with 3 systems. It’s risk managing the job into absurdity. It should be stopped in it’s tracks. The AA has to make better representation to HSE on our behalf. Pic below just to show close up of structurally poor central lead of Ash (right) and alternate anchor choice (left)

Is it applicable in every situation, at all times in the tree? That's what we're discussing. We're at risk of loosing the freedom to move around the canopy on one line. Picture a dense Oak canopy - the interior crowded with secondary branches which the tree needs to sustain the main structural branches - you can't remove them. Now picture working in that tree all day on a crown reduction using two DdRT lines, dragging the trailing ends everywhere you go - they’re constantly get tangled and twisted into each other regardless of your attentive rope management. The groundie constantly entering the dropzone to feed the slack of your two ropes into separate bags, untwisting the ropes the best he can, trying to keep them free of each other - it's impossible, they both go where you go. You need to rig a branch. The rigged branch gets caught up in the trailing ends of the two lines 20ft below you, it's too heavy for you to lift, it's stuck there, the ground crew can't lower it anymore, you cant descend to free it - your twin lines are trapped. The vast majority of climbers today are attached to the tree twice when cutting. So what is twin rope climbing for? .

I'm against the mandatory/enforced two rope system at all times being pushed by the HSE and AA. You carry on using your own system if your happy with it. There's no argument from that perspective, it's just that your chosen method wont comply with the ICOP (as it stands) and your insurance will be voided should you or your climbers have an accident and it was found you didn't have two full length climbing systems in the tree. .

Right, exactly. Now tell that to the AA in the consultation on the ICOP draft.

Carry on doing what you're doing if your happy with it, but it falls short of what is described here in the ICOP draft.

It doesn't, you cant descend to the ground on your short rope should you cut your long main rope.

It not, it's says backed up at all times which means during ascent, working the tree and descent. Back up means a second climbing system. That's why it's called a back up, you cut your main line you can descend to the ground on the back up.

They haven't. It's there in the draft. 'Two personal fall protection systems installed over two independent load-bearing anchors must be the preferred method of working at all times.'

NPTC - Two Rope Working at Heights Statement for Aerial Assessors 703650179_TwoRopeWorking-AssessorStatementDec2019 (3).pdf 4 Descent • Both primary and secondary working systems should be long enough to descend to ground. The AA current guidance - 'Access Rope Advance System Have 3 viable systems prior to leaving the ground (2 climbing lines, 1 lanyard). Install systems 1 & 2 (2 climbing lines) from ground. Test each system. Ascend to first anchor. Maintain 2 climbing systems at all times Repeat to final anchor point. Descent Both primary and secondary working systems should be long enough to descend to the ground.' .

They want the back up second rope to be long enough to descend to the ground with your main line from any point in the tree regardless of wether it's a DdRT/MRT or SRT system. Your long rope/shorter rope(+lanyard) method wouldn't meet the requirements of the legislation. The HSE want treeclimbers/arb to move into the same system as IRATA/Industrial Rope Access. Two full length ropes at all times from the ground up to the final descent plus a lanyard for change overs ('3 viable systems'). .