Tree Climbing with Others!

I know the founder, Joe Maher, of Tree Climber's Coalition. I could not find his web site by name or search. Is this idea still a concept? I support the idea but have not seen anything on it yet. What do you know?

Here you go Peter. Be well.

Rod Justice

http://www.treeclimbercoalition.org/

Rescueman (or anyone else who knows the answer), I'm not a rock climber or a caver, so I don't know what is involved in getting trained in those fields. Are there national associations or groups that set some kind of minimum standards of knowledge that a person must know before training others? What about for even climbing in certain areas? For example, I assume the people that you see climbing Half Dome at Yosemite have to get a permit from the National Park Service in order to climb. Do you have to show that you've attained some minimal level of experience or training to be allowed to get a permit? I'm honestly asking for information because it relates to my next idea:

It seems like we might be nearing the point in our sport (and yes, I believe we are involved in something that can be legitimately called a "sport") where having guidelines or standards of practice makes sense. I think this is particularly true as different climbers work with city, state, and national authorities in order to get access to climb sites. If there was a set guidelines that identified what an experienced climber is expected to know, a climber could say to a Park Ranger: "Look, I'd like to climb here. Here's what is involved in my sport. Here is the set of skills that the tree climbing community has determined that I should have. I'll be safe, people on the ground will be safe, the tree will be safe. Can I climb here?"

Of course, the question comes up: "How do you PROVE that you have those skills?" I'm leaving that question out of it for now. As Bob has suggested, at this point it seems like we need to discuss "What does a good tree climber need to know?" If people are willing to check out another site, http://www.treeclimbercoalition.org has been set up to try and get a consensus about what tree climbing is or is not.
Respectfully,
Patrick

I have tried 6 times to join up with Tree Climbers Coalition but it stops when you push "join". Any coaching on how to do it?

Everybody who has participated in this thread deserves credit -- Abe for bringing it up in the first place; Red Panda for offering his thoughts from the other side of the globe; Rescueman for his insightful comments; Treeman for his explanation of the founding of this sport; Rod for his clarity; Dan for his adament defense of safe instruction; and others who I mght have missed.

I cannot claim to be a "student" of Treeclimbers International, but I have leaned nearly all of my techniques -- double-rope climbing, single-rope climbing, a half-dozen rescue techinques for both styles, various adaptive techniques, lanyard climbing, etc. -- from people who got their start through Peter's school at Treeclimbers International. To all of this I have added various other skills such as wilderness navigation, outdoor ethics training, self-rescue and survival techniques, additional vertical rescue techniques, and first aid training.

My best moment in treeclimbing came at a meeting one evening about 18 months ago, when Peter Jenkins presented me and five others with Master Instructor cerfification.

I never paid Peter even one cent for all that I learned, and he never asked for any money. The only money I ever spent for instruction was about $325 to take the Treeclimbing USA course for facilitators about four years ago. Whenever I look back at what I learned from Abe Winters, John Routon and Joe Maher in that very intensive three-day course, I realize I got one helluva great bargain. I have tried to pay all of them back by helping out at their climbs, and they have responded in kind by participating in some of mine.

When Elliot Su flew all the way from Taiwan a year ago to learn recreational treeclimbing (at a huge expense, I might add) at the TCI school in Atlanta, several of us (including Tim Kovar, Joe Maher, Peter Hedin, Abe Winters, John Routon and Naomi Waggener) volunteered our time to take Elliot on a camping trip into the wilds of the southern Appalachians to hone his newly-learned skills. Elliot's school, Treeclimbing Taiwan, is already the second-largest treeclimbing organization in eastern Asia and he has joined the leadership of the Taiwan Society of Wilderness.

What I'm trying to say is this: Even though I'm partially self-taught, I firmly believe that there is NO substitute for good, qualified instruction. And the only way to get that instruction is through interaction with skilled people who have already learned to solve many of the unusual and life-threatening problems that can be encountered in a vertical environment.

The question of who determines the qualifications for recreational/educational treeclimbing instructors and subject matter is something that has bugged all of us in the recreational treeclimbing community for a long time. Quite a few of us have met many times, both formally and informally, to come up with some sort of qualifications and standards. Our reason for meeting has always been the same: IF WE DON'T DEVELOP OUR OWN RULES, THEN SOME ORGANIZATION LIKE THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE OR THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE IS EVENTUALLY GOING TO WRITE UP A SET RULES FOR US, AND THOSE RULES ARE PROBABLY GOING TO BE SO TOUGH THAT MOST OF US WILL JUST GIVE UP AND FIND SOME OTHER ACTIVITY TO OCCUPY OUR TIME.

None of us want that...!

But, even though we met and discussed this subject many times in Atlanta, North Carolina, Michigan, Virginia, Alabama, the Republic of Panama, Taiwan and elsewhere, nothing was ever done. It was like everybody was waiting on somebody else to do it.

We finally could wait no longer. Just this week, with more than a little prodding from our insurance carriers, several of us from various treeclimbing groups got together and wrote the first draft of a short list of "policy standards" that will be attached to our insurance policies. Some people whose insurance policies were coming up for review couldn't attend, but we made several phone calls during our meeting to keep them up to date. Our rough draft is compiled from various sources, including Forest Service regulations and ISA suggestions. It covers suggested minimum standards for instructors and facilitators, gear standards, climber requirements and non-climber requirements. Once this list (only one page, single spaced) is complete, I hope and believe it will be posted on this and/or other websites for all of us to read.

No document is ever perfect (with the exception of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address) but it is a starting point for us. After all, somebody had to do it so we finally did...!

Originally posted by Treeman
I have tried 6 times to join up with Tree Climbers Coalition but it stops when you push "join". Any coaching on how to do it?

I've also had problems with signup/signon in the past. Your best bet would be to email the webmaster at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Let him know what problems you're having.

Wild Bill. The work done a few days ago is in my hands and they can not be classified as "standrds" in tree climbing. They are procedural methods used by instructors. They are very broad in scope and not usable for the general public.

Ok,

I've held my hat on this one for some time. Stewing, if you will.

I am, as many of you know, completly self taught.


Now that those of you who didn't know that have picked yourselves up from the floor you can continue to read.

I do not in any way think that anyone should be self taught. I had a unique experience that I was a high rise window washer, and developed what I knew, with discussions with arborists, and from various publications my tree climbing abilities. Am I a safe climber? Ask anyone that has climbed with me and they will invariably say yes.

Should anyone follow my example? NO!
I am (and I say this as modestly as possible) exceptional in my abilities to learn new tasks. I taught my self to use autocad, and now work in the residential design field as a draftsman, I do the highest end homes that my firm does, all of the homes I've drawn in the past year have been 2million and up. How many people can say that they taught themselves thier profession? Very few indeed. I have worked with literraly dozens of individuals who have college degrees in the field that could not properly draw a cracker box. My point in all this bragging is that only through successful application of a learned activity can one proove the knowledge. By successful aplication in the presence of properly trained members of the community can that knowledge be verified.


This all sounds confusing. What I am trying to say is this: all climbers should have proper training, but there should be a way for others who have come to knowledge and proper ability to proove thier skills and gain certification status. Anyone who wishes to train SHOULD have proper certification and training. Not because it provides finiancial stability for the training orginization, but because it prevents a disaster if the trainer should be sued, a very real proposition in the USA.

My point in brief (because I don't understand half of what I wrote!):

--Standards of safety should be defined.
--Certification should be availible through examination, in conjunction with, but not exclusivly through a training program
--A recognized set of standards should be developed, and published by a recognized, standing, not for profit orginization that outline the minimum skills learned and demonstrated, by trainers
I think that this list covers all the the issues brought up, and covers all the concerns of myself and others. Plus it will save us all from anarchy and rules implementations by forest service or others.
I wish I had a card that said I "shouldn't kill myself" while climbing to show to park managers while asking for permission to climb. A program like this would solve it all.

Above all, Climb Safe!
Icabod

Hello all.

First off, thank you Robert for your insights and information. I found them very helpful. You make a very important point that I hope the tree climbing community will take to heart.

Incidents that you cite concerning the increase in accidents after gyms (and God knows who else) started teaching rock climbing also occurred in the whitewater rafting/canoeing arena after the movie Deliverence came out. My understanding is that there were something like 18 deaths on the Chatooga River (where the movie was filmed) shortly thereafter and the government stepped in and put the skids on who could go down the river, i.e. only approved rafting companies with trained guides. And, I feel, rightly so because those that died were going through class 6 rapids on truck innertubes and $2.00 inflatable rafts from Kmart. They died because they were ill-prepared, ill-equiped and no one explained river safety to them.

Being a relatively new activity, we have the opportunity to learn from the past mistakes of the rock climbing and rafting communities. Icabod was right on the money. We have the ability and opportunity to make sure that a non-profit organization, run by actual tree climbers, can provide the oversight that we need to police ourselves. Perfsonally, I don't care who is involved with the non-profit, where they were trained or by who, as long as they can demonstrate safety and competence and are willing to help.

The first time a recreational climber is killed, it will most likely be someone who read a book, went to the hardware store, bought 150 feet of rope for 6 bucks and took off up a tree thinking "Hell, this oughta be easy."

The first time it happens in a national forest, some government agency trying to justify its existence will step in to our rescue. We must be prepared to answer their attempts with something already in place. As I see it, the non-profit is the perfect vehicle.

Again, we have the opportunity to do it right from the beginning. I'd hate to see us squander it. We can do it ourselves or have someone eventually do it for us. Outdoorists will discover tree climbing just as they did rock climbing and rafting. We have a responsibility to make sure that they will also discover it safely for their, as well as our own sakes.

Rod Justice

Originally posted by RescueMan
There are no national standards for participants involved in rock-climbing or caving. ...
I don't know what access policies are in the western US (I don't think there are any...

Thanks for the information!
I looked up Yosemite's climbing info on the nps.gov website. They had a very interesting acticle that reviewed the reported climbing deaths at the park from the last 20 years. Click HERE for the article. In that article, I was surprised to read: "The NPS has no regulations specifying how you must climb. There is one regulation, however, requiring that all park users act responsibly."

In another NPS document ( HERE ), it states: "Rock climbing and other forms of mountaineering are historical uses in Yosemite and other national parks. When properly managed, the National Park Service believes these are important and valued forms of recreation that allow people to enjoy unique park environments."

Statements like these bode well for us as tree climbers as we work to gain access to public climbing sites.
Patrick

Hello all.

I just read the article that Patrick found. Everyone needs to read this! And I hope that no one in the tree climbing community ever has to write an article like this one, describing numerous deaths and how they could have been prevented.

Rod Justice

From reading the NPS study on rock climbing it is apparent that the parks department there, and most likely nationwide, depends on its state Land Use Statutes. Every state has this kind of statute and this is a quick summary on how it works legally.

The public land is open to public use. Public use is voluntary. No tickets are being used to gain admission excepting park entrance fees which are apparently exempt from “professional profiteering”. The park retains its protection by not taking responsibility to check rock climbing gear or skill levels. This keeps all activity on a voluntary basis. It may charge for rescue services rendered however. But the bill goes to the user these days- thus maintaining the voluntary status of the public using private lands at their own risk.

I have approached many park services in the past on local, state, and national levels. They want to know that tree climbing will not kill trees (and thus cause property damage and loss). Trees can be killed quickly and perish if abused, unlike rock which can still be standing even if they are maligned. I think this is the biggest issue.

They also want to know that people won’t get hurt but that issue might be on the low list of priorities because all climbers participate voluntarily which kicks their land use statutes into play for protection.

How to overcome this issue? I have no idea. After 21 years it is still a big issue.

With the recent additions of climbing on public lands I would like to add a few thoughts. In wilderness areas owned by whichever or whomever government watchdog I suggest that if you are going to climb there to do so off the beaten trail and away from camp sites. To keep the noise down to those close at hand or use radios. To leave no trace and climb the trees as one finds them not cutting anything or dislodging any widow makers unless absolutly necessary. Practice common sense and respect the forest and trees, the animals, and the other humans that also are visitors to the area. Bill Maher posted a wilderness ethics page awhile back, maybe we can get him to bring it out again. As to climbing in/on public property in urban areas that is owned by government I can say with proper introductions, a corporative attituide, a willingness to work with officials, and documentation that you are qualified to do that which you are saying you can do you can and often times will be excepted. For the past 8+ years now TCUSA has had a working relationship with our local government and the recreation department. We climb regularily on their property with groups of all sizes and ages.Since our beginnings with them we have now climbed with other County Parks and Recreation Departments and hope to continue to do so as well as to expand our climbing venues. So don't be discouraged, be patient and use good common sense when approaching them. Until; Safety in and for the trees worldwide! Abe

For every activity that I've engaged which contains the word climb, there are numerous stories that range from close calls to death. The exception is "recreational tree climbing". Following my graduation from high school in the late 70's, I did tree work. Other than using a rope to suspend from a tree, these techniques under discussion didn't exist for us. As a result, I'm the biggest fan of what has been accomplished with rope techniques in general. Moreover I applaud every published comment by the experienced tree climber. The essence of this thread is about preserving safety in recreational tree climbing. Discussing and publishing standards is the only way to accomplish that worthy objective.

There is a nucleus of people in the Georgia region that have clearly advanced the techniques of recreational tree climbing. Afterall, they provided this forum and numerous other websites, which serve to educate people on this activity. They've established the benchmark for group training. No organization can control the actions of the individual in how they choose to climb a tree. However we as members of this climbing community need to approach with the highest respect how to properly instruct a group of people.

The recreational tree climbing businesses in the Georgia region aren't structured to train the world. The world is enthusiastic about safely climbing trees, and the world is buying New Tribe harnesses and Jepson's "The Tree Climber's Companion". Just as the Georgia region has been a nucleus of training, other regions will independently establish themselves. Variation will exist. However the Georgia region remains the original benchmark and the voice of safety.

The voice of the experienced tree climbers in this thread have provided a tremendous service that I personally understand. I would like to thank you for that.

People are unecessarily falling from ladders and deer tree stands (which apparently is an American right of passage). I believe that the rope techniques under discussion have a wider range of benefit than recreation. As a community of tree climbers, we need to coalesce on the issue of safety and continue arguing the details. This serves to evolve the best practice.

If there are "rogue" groups with questionable training techniques, then published standards are the way to go.

Regards,
JimK

Hello all.

I agree with Robert to the extent that his worries may well apply to the professional (that is commercial) recreational tree climbing. But then I'm not sure that experimentation should take place using novice, paying customers. Experimentation and innovation will continue to occur with the private climbers and will filter down to the commercial folks after it's been proven safe and accepted in the field by the private climbers.

Likewise with his second concern. I would hope that the legal profession would clamp down on anyone using questionable techniques on commercial climbers who don't have the skill or judgement to decide for themselves if an activity/technique is safe or not. That's the whole point of setting standards; not to protect Rod from himself (that's Darwin at work and I'd prefer not to be on the Darwin Awards list) but to protect the people that Rod decides to take climbing with him or teach.

Ultimately, this concern would come down to the independant "expert" who would undoubtedly be called to testify. "Would any reasonable, trained climber expect this support system to hold?" "Would any reasonable, trained climber...?" and so on.

It becomes a question of Moral standards, are you providing safe instruction to people who wouldn't know otherwise? If you're climbing/teaching using questionable techniques, that's the question you have to ask yourself, and would be asked of you in the event of a legal challenge, do you meet the moral safety standards, printed or not?

I really like your last suggestion because it mirrors my thoughts exactly. A good set of standards will always include language such as this that allows for experimentation and innovation, for the personal climber. Good standards also provide schedules and opportunities for future revision to include innovations into the basics. This is one way the innovations would be approved for the commercial/novice climbers who entrust their safety to us.

Rod Justice