UKTC Archive

Re: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?

Subject: Re: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?
From: Julian Dunster
Date: Dec 04 2019 22:14:23
In rock, ice or mountain climbing about the only time I ever used two 9 mm ropes was on horizontal or diagonal traverses, or occasionally as a haul line for gear. Otherwise it was always an 11 or 10 mm single line. Requiring two ropes in a tree is silly and likely to be a desk arborist or non arborist who has never actually been in a tree.

I still have one of my original 120 foot Viking hawser laid nylon ropes from the late 60's. We discovered that window blind companies stocked them and sold them at a far lower cost than the outdoor store. One was dunked in red dye so that we could easily see a red or white (dirty grey) line once on the hill or crag. They worked well enough except when wet or frozen. Then they were a real pain to maul through biners or descenders, or even over the shoulder in a classic abseil mode that many of us used before Clog came out with a Figure of 8.

"And ya tell the kids of today and they won't believe you."

On Behalf of Dunster and Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd.


Dr. Julian A Dunster R.P.F., R.P.P.., M.C.I.P., ISA Certified Arborist,
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist # 378,
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
Honourary Life Member ISA + PNWISA

North American distributor for Rinntech
www.dunster.ca
www.treelaw.info
www.rinntech.info

On Wed/12/4/2019 2:01 PM, Brad Cadwallader wrote:
My climbing career is well over but I do stay in touch with what is going on 
and for many years co-ordinated the NZ Climbing Regional and National 
competitions.

Therefore I cannot fathom why you would implement the requirement for a 
mandatory two independent climbing system as the norm. Whoever came up with 
this idea clearly is not a climber and does not understand the work an 
arborist performs.

[look to the USA as they are ahead of us in this regard as usual]

USA does not require two independent climbing systems. The Z133 Industry 
Standards states:

8.1.4 While working aloft, the climber shall have available a climbing line 
and at least one other means of being secured on his/her person at all times 
(e.g., an arborist climbing line and a work-positioning lanyard). Two means 
of being secured shall be used when the climber determines that it is 
advantageous.

8.1.6The arborist shall be secured at all times while ascending the tree, 
including when using climbing spurs/gaffs. The arborist shall be tied in once 
the work begins and remain tied in until the work is completed and he/she has 
returned to the ground. The arborist shall be secured when repositioning the 
climbing line. When repositioning, the arborist shall preload the new tie-in 
point with his/her full weight before releasing the current means of being 
secured.

The ITCC Competition rules state that a climber must lanyard in at each work 
station.

Nowhere do the USA standards or ITCC rules state that two independent 
climbing systems shall be used at all times - that's just silly.

Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
[mailto:uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of Mike Finch
Sent: 4 December 2019 10:47 a.m.
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: Re: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?

As a daily climbing arborist I whole hearty welcome this 'new' move to two

independent climbing systems as the norm. I always find it absurd that we

climb on this small single 11mm line at such height on an unrated and

unknown anchor. I cant wait to see the climbing kits and climbing styles

evolve; look to the USA as they are ahead of us in this regard as usual. I

love the freedom of single rope climbing but there is NO redundancy in

place. If this move can save but one life it is worth it.

Regards, Mike Finch

Finch Arboriculture Ltd

On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 14:21, Paul Smith <paul@xxxxxx.org.uk> wrote:

Hi Jerry, something HSE are currently "looking into" but currently there
is no industry specific 'SIC' code for registering accidents / incidents to
arb so they have to search the database on key words, very time consuming
and not always very accurate (apparently.)
Hence HSE do have lost of figures / stats but can't categorically say for
arb and whether accidents have reduced because of LOLER.
Equally number of people working in the industry is very difficult to
determine, because of the demographic and lots of self-employed, but a
recent publication indicated circa 21k.
Regards
Paul Smith
Technical Officer &
Accreditation Schemes Manager (Contractors)
Registered Office
The Malthouse, Stroud Green, Standish,
Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, GL10 3DL
Arboricultural Association Ltd
Company No. 4070377, Charity Number 1083845
Arboricultural Association Trading Ltd Company No. 05180170
Switch to Ecosia � the Search Engine that plants trees!
-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
On Behalf Of Jerry Ross
Sent: 03 December 2019 14:16
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?
OK Paul - I understand these are not regs, but the question still stands,
are these more stringent best-practice non-regs actually going to make a
difference to the number of injuries?
It seems to me that the LOLER situation might be informative as to whether
these measures to actually do what they're supposed to do. You say time
will tell.   Well has time told as far as LOLER is concerned?
There's been plenty of time so there should be lots of pre- and post-LOLER
statistics on the number of accidents. Do you (does the HSE) have them?
One would, of course, also have to take into account any increase in the
number of people working in the industry, so that would be another set of
statistics.
On 03/12/2019 13:43, Paul Smith wrote:
Hi Jerry,
I guess "time will tell" and, unlike LOLER, this is not the introduction
of new HSE regulations but an updating of 'industry best practice' (an
academic point really.) However, at least now HSE do have better informed
figures / stats to measure against, unlike previously when LOLER came in.
2 rope working has always been, and will remain, a feature of tree
climbing techniques but the expectation going forward is that the frequency
of such will increase and where it does not the justification for such, ie.
using a single-rope, will have to be robustly determined.
Paul Smith
Technical Officer &
Accreditation Schemes Manager (Contractors)
Email: paul@xxxxxx.org.uk
www.trees.org.uk
Registered Office
The Malthouse, Stroud Green, Standish, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire,
GL10 3DL Arboricultural Association Ltd Company No. 4070377, Charity
Number 1083845 Arboricultural Association Trading Ltd Company No.
05180170
Switch to Ecosia � the Search Engine that plants trees!
-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
<uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> On Behalf Of Jerry Ross
Sent: 03 December 2019 13:27
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?
By how much will two rope working actually reduce accidents?  If none or
insignificantly, will it be abandoned?
I asked this question twenty odd years ago when LOLER was introduced,
whether there would be a review after a few years to determine whether and
by how many had accidents within the arb industry been reduced; and if the
answer was none or insignificantly, would the regulations be repealed?
Answer came there none.
I wonder what the answer is: there should be plenty of data now. So can
anyone tell me by how much HAVE accidents actually been reduced (taking
into account any change in the number of people working in the industry)
since the introduction of LOLER?
Of course LOLER was quite successful as a work creation scheme; but did
it do what it was supposed to do?
Will two-rope working?
On 03/12/2019 12:42, Steve wrote:
Precisely Paul none!
-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
[mailto:uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of Paul Smith
Sent: 03 December 2019 12:38
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?
Hi Steve, simplistically the evidence, as far as HSE are concerned, is
here
https://www.trees.org.uk/News-Blog/Latest-News/HSE-Fall-from-Height-Incidents-involving-arborists
at least to some extent.
Regards,
Paul
Paul Smith
Technical Officer &
Accreditation Schemes Manager (Contractors)
Email: paul@xxxxxx.org.uk
www.trees.org.uk
Registered Office
The Malthouse, Stroud Green, Standish, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire,
GL10 3DL Arboricultural Association Ltd Company No. 4070377, Charity
Number 1083845 Arboricultural Association Trading Ltd Company No.
05180170
Switch to Ecosia � the Search Engine that plants trees!
-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
<uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: 03 December 2019 11:58
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: RE: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?
Let's be honest this is a totally unjustifiable interference by people
that are at best uniformed and at worst have a vested interest in
additional training modules! Where is the evidence to justify this?
-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
[mailto:uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info] On Behalf Of Paul Smith
Sent: 03 December 2019 11:06
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?
Hi Paul, the "�60 million dollar question" just now.
Acknowledging you are asking here, on UKTC, but if you asked the
regulator (the HSE) they would say the 'immediate implications' are those
they�ve been expecting us to have been working to since 2005, i.e. 2 rope
with 2 independent anchors...in practice the exception rather than the rule.
Further information will follow shortly in relation to the amended /
updated ICoP, and Technical Guide 1, firstly to industry consultation
before production and then to be incorporated in updated working practices
and training / assessment procedures etc.
For now "watch this space", i.e. the AA website, and be thinking about
opportunities to move to 2-rope working where it will not hinder nor
increase the risk of working / tree climbing activities, particularly at
points of deemed higher risk, e.g. on access / on change-overs / using
tools etc. Also be thinking about updating risk assessments and
incorporating the 2-rope hierarchy etc. and associated justifications.
Hoping this helps, at least a little.
Regards,
PAUL
Paul Smith
Technical Officer &
Accreditation Schemes Manager (Contractors)
Email: paul@xxxxxx.org.uk
Registered Office
The Malthouse, Stroud Green, Standish, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire,
GL10 3DL Arboricultural Association Ltd Company No. 4070377, Charity
Number 1083845 Arboricultural Association Trading Ltd Company No.
05180170
Switch to Ecosia � the Search Engine that plants trees!
-----Original Message-----
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
<uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> On Behalf Of PC
Sent: 03 December 2019 10:49
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Implementing a Two-Ropes System - HSE Requirement?
Morning all,
Is anybody aware of the immediate implications for climbing Arborists
and managers in relation to the web-link below:
https://www.trees.org.uk/News-Blog/Latest-News/Two-rope-working-�-an-
u
pdate
Thanks,
Paul
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/
--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info
The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/




--
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy
http://www.boskytrees.co.uk/