# Free climbing



## sheep (Sep 5, 2006)

does anyone else here strictly free climb with absolutely no equipment? trees in pittsburgh are generally not that tall but... usually, i dont think any type of equipment is needed. just some nice shoes so you don't end up kicking all that bark off.

someone ought to edit the wikipedia page about tree climbing, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_climbing adding something more about free climbing

i would edit it but i have very strong opinions and i dont want that to influence my article. also, i'd probably be giving out advise unconsiously like "safety equipment is unneccesary" and then people die because of it...


----------



## begleytree (Sep 5, 2006)

This should be fun 
-Ralph opcorn:


----------



## l2edneck (Sep 6, 2006)

*Love to free climb but fell to much .....*

so now i atleast use saddle n lanyard.

and a aluminum aid of course


----------



## Fireaxman (Sep 6, 2006)

sheep said:


> ... i'd probably be giving out advise unconsiously like "safety equipment is unneccesary" and then people die because of it...



Kinda late, but I'm glad you had second thoughts. Maybe you would like to go back and edit your post in the "Kids in Trees" thread. If you edit yours, I'll edit mine. If you delete yours, I'll delete mine, to be sure the original quote is off the record.


----------



## OTG BOSTON (Sep 6, 2006)

leave the guy alone. he is an arbolist after all


----------



## rmihalek (Sep 6, 2006)

*both*

As a kid, we could easily find big trees with low limbs to free climb, so that's all we did. I probably spent hundreds of hours freeclimbing willows and beeches in my yard and my friends yard. There was even a nice beech at the previous Boston Tree climb in Franklin Park that I did a little bit of free climbing on. Most of the trees I encounter now have their first limbs about 35 or so feet up, so I "aid climb" those.


----------



## moss (Sep 6, 2006)

sheep said:


> does anyone else here strictly free climb with absolutely no equipment?



Not likely. Why would you want to limit yourself to only climbing without gear? I just did a free climb at sunset yesterday. I usually free climb about once a week, I love it. It's a unique climbing practice with it's own skill set. It can be easy or very challenging, depends on the tree and the climber. There's no need to cultivate a purist "climbing without gear" point of view, it's apples and oranges a completely different climbing practice. One does not exclude the other. There are way too many trees that you absolutely cannot climb without gear. I mean zero gear, that includes vines or other "natural assists" like leaning a small dead tree against another tree. That is a primitive ladder and is gear. A vine is a rope, unrated but a rope  You can probably tell I've had this discussion before. Enjoy your free climbing and sometime get an experienced rope climber to take you up (if you haven't already). It will open up a world of possibilities for your tree climbing and your free climbing skills will come in handy. A minimal rope climbing setup is very inexpensive.

I won't bother with the free climbing vs. aid climbing poll. This is a division in the rock climbing world that doesn't translate to tree climbing. The value system in recreational tree climbing is much different, egos are toned down. We are accepting of other climbers viewpoints, everyone has their own style and gear configurations. Competition is minimized, that's why it's called recreational climbing. Rec climbers are looking for quality tree time. There's plenty of adrenaline available if you like that. I can get your heart pounding in a tree very easily while you're supported by rope, I don't care if you have ice in your veins. If you want challenge you'll find it roped or not, you can't avoid challenge climbing trees. Am I ranting? 
-moss


----------



## OTG BOSTON (Sep 6, 2006)

Moss, I never would have figured you would condone freeclimbing...................just when you think you know someone....... 

I get what you're saying about the different skillset and such. I'm not going to say I've never done it but I wouldn't call it a leisure activity either.

I guess for rec. purposes it isn't all that bad......I'd just hate to be the guy who slipped and went out like that...........


----------



## moss (Sep 6, 2006)

OTG BOSTON said:


> Moss, I never would have figured you would condone freeclimbing...................just when you think you know someone.......
> 
> I get what you're saying about the different skillset and such. I'm not going to say I've never done it but I wouldn't call it a leisure activity either.
> 
> I guess for rec. purposes it isn't all that bad......I'd just hate to be the guy who slipped and went out like that...........



Free climbing is what it is. I don't recommend it, it's my personal choice. It's very limited looking at the full spectrum of tree climbing possibilities and with every foot of vertical height you gain the stakes are raised exponentially. I don't do moves that I don't feel very comfortable committing to. It can be much more physically demanding than roped climbing unless you're climbing a ladder branch configuration. I climb well within my personal risk level, I love life as much as he next guy or gal. Every person has to know what their capabilities are roped or not roped and climb within their limits. Otherwise a climber is going to expose themselves to Darwin's laws (being stupid may cause death).
-moss


----------



## Climb020 (Sep 6, 2006)

Though I don't believe in leaving the ground anymore without being tied in no matter the size of the tree I have some advice for some free climbers who want to take it a little farther.

DON'T limit yourself to just trees that have low branches or closely spaced branches. Hear is what you do: turn on the TV and go to animal planet. Now what until a bear show comes on and watch them climb trees. I use to climb this way and it is very hard and physically demanding. Also I wouln't recommend climbing any more then 30' at a clip without a limb to take a brake at. 

Just wrap your arms around the tree then wrap your legs around. Pull your legs up the trunk then reach up higher with your arms and continue. I can give a quick video demo if someone doesn't quite under stand. BUT be VERY VERY VERY careful coming down the tree. Use the same position like a fireman and slide down the trunk. Make sure thought that your torso is not touching the tree at all. The bark will pull your shirt up and the bark WILL scratch you VERY badly. Trust me I learned from expierence. 

If you like the going up part and not the coming down just set your line in the tree before hand and attach your saddle to the rope. So now when you climb as high as you want you can just CAREFULLY position yourself on a branch and pull your saddle up. Put a small piece of rope on your saddle if you cannot balance yourself while putting on the saddle. You can use the rope to tie yourself to the trunk in case of a fall. This is just a safety measure and WILL hurt if you slip. But it won't hurt nearly as bad as falling out of the tree.


----------



## sheep (Sep 6, 2006)

Woah there! calm down guys! i was just going to ask various techniques for freeclimbing. I can usually climb the trunk without the use of a limb or rope if the trunk is no more wide than me but any wider, i can't get up. how do you guys do it?


----------



## beowulf343 (Sep 6, 2006)

Depends on the definition of "free climbing." I've gone up a tree with my spikes and not bothered with my lanyard-this can be called free climbing. But climbing with no gear-never. Too many trees out there that are too hard to get up without at least a rope.


----------



## moss (Sep 6, 2006)

sheep said:


> I can usually climb the trunk without the use of a limb or rope if the trunk is no more wide than me but any wider, i can't get up. how do you guys do it?



You can't. If you can't grab on and stick to the trunk you have to start using some kind of gear, either spurs and lanyard (not compatible with rec climbing do not disturb or damage wilderness ethics) or rope and harness.

With very large trees that have heavily textured bark you can potentially use rock climbing technique. Basically if the bark fissures are large enough you can wedge a hand or foot in.
-moss


----------



## sheep (Sep 6, 2006)

heavily textured bark often falls off and then i feel bad for harming the tree.
however, i do focus on small irregularities on the trunck - a slight indent or a lump left by a branch that might have fallen off.

how bad is it for the tree if the bark falls off?


----------



## rahtreelimbs (Sep 6, 2006)

sheep said:


> does anyone else here strictly free climb with absolutely no equipment? trees in pittsburgh are generally not that tall but... usually, i dont think any type of equipment is needed. just some nice shoes so you don't end up kicking all that bark off.
> 
> someone ought to edit the wikipedia page about tree climbing, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_climbing adding something more about free climbing
> 
> i would edit it but i have very strong opinions and i dont want that to influence my article. also, i'd probably be giving out advise unconsiously like "safety equipment is unneccesary" and then people die because of it...



Trees in Pittsburgh not big.............think again! There are many trees here that 90-100 ft.

As far as free climbing...........only if you have a death wish!!!


----------



## rahtreelimbs (Sep 6, 2006)

begleytree said:


> This should be fun
> -Ralph opcorn:





Biography:
I love tree climbing and refuse to use any harnesses or safety equipment. I'm an arbolist in some sense but not others... 



Yeah really!!!:notrolls2:


----------



## sheep (Sep 6, 2006)

rahtreelimbs said:


> Trees in Pittsburgh not big.............think again! There are many trees here that 90-100 ft.
> 
> As far as free climbing...........only if you have a death wish!!!



pittsburgh... i actually meant in the city area including the big parks but i don't drive and my dad will not drive half an hour just so i can climb trees. he's not bothered by me climbing at all... if its that dangerous (which it isnt) he should be so the fact the isnt bothered shows that its not incredibly dangerous.


----------



## sheep (Sep 6, 2006)

TreeCo said:


> What does your dad do for a living?


chemical engineering? why do you ask? why is it relevant?


----------



## rahtreelimbs (Sep 6, 2006)

sheep said:


> pittsburgh... i actually meant in the city area including the big parks but i don't drive and my dad will not drive half an hour just so i can climb trees. he's not bothered by me climbing at all... if its that dangerous (which it isnt) he should be so the fact the isnt bothered shows that its not incredibly dangerous.




Wrong again!!! The city has big trees. Take a look at some of the Sycamores in the city parks and on the city streets!


Dangerous........not with the proper climbing equipment, proper traning and PPE!

Without it......you are an accident waiting to happen!

Just how old are you?


----------



## Fireaxman (Sep 6, 2006)

sheep said:


> chemical engineering? why do you ask? why is it relevant?



Your dad simply may not recognize the hazards if he is not exposed to them in his occupation or training.


----------



## sheep (Sep 7, 2006)

TreeCo said:


> You offered up his opinion is why I asked.
> 
> Who would likely know more about the danger of free climbing trees?
> 
> ...


I wouldnt exactly call him an arborist but he is a person who as a child climbed trees very often. I think he was hired by people in his village to gather the fruits on top because there were many old people in the village.


----------



## moss (Sep 7, 2006)

sheep said:


> heavily textured bark often falls off and then i feel bad for harming the tree.
> however, i do focus on small irregularities on the trunck - a slight indent or a lump left by a branch that might have fallen off.
> 
> how bad is it for the tree if the bark falls off?



If you take bark off down to the cambium (the live inner bark, usually light green or pale colored) you are damaging the tree. Take a look at a tree like a shagbark hickory, if you shinnied up the trunk you'd strip a lot of loose bark but probably wouldn't hurt the tree. White oak has loose surface bark on higher branches, it will sometimes fall off just by foot contact. That will not expose the cambium. You might need a rope to get up there to see what that bark is like 

I grew up climbing all over a big beech in my yard and a few horse chestnuts. There was also a pair of big white oaks. I was never able to climb them, first limbs were at 20 feet and no handholds on the smooth lower trunks. Beech has to be the best free climbing tree but the bark is very thin, you can scrape to green easily. Sneakers or barefeet is good on beech bark.

Climb safe!
-moss


----------



## sheep (Sep 9, 2006)

oh yes i know what you mean about beech. there's one nearby that has its lowest limb at around 8 ft and then for the next 15 or so feet, it didnt have any branches. Its just a little slanted and there's a small lump that used to be a branch half way up. I never really dared to climb it since it was on a hill and I can't jump down if i wanted to. yesterday, when i was semisuicidal, I decided to climb all the way to the top of that tree. it was one of the nicest climbs i've had in a really long time. (bark doesnt dig into your hands, clothes dont get caught on branches, didnt get scratched by any twigs comming down.)


----------



## moss (Sep 9, 2006)

sheep said:


> oh yes i know what you mean about beech. there's one nearby that has its lowest limb at around 8 ft and then for the next 15 or so feet, it didnt have any branches. Its just a little slanted and there's a small lump that used to be a branch half way up. I never really dared to climb it since it was on a hill and I can't jump down if i wanted to. yesterday, when i was semisuicidal, I decided to climb all the way to the top of that tree. it was one of the nicest climbs i've had in a really long time. (bark doesnt dig into your hands, clothes dont get caught on branches, didnt get scratched by any twigs comming down.)



Sounds like a great climb, nothing like standing in the top of a beech. 

I've been thinking about a really simple freeclimbing backup setup. Basically it would allow you to free climb but would catch you if you fall at a difficult point. Let me know if you're interested in hearing more.
-moss


----------



## geofore (Sep 9, 2006)

*use the bus*



sheep said:


> pittsburgh... i actually meant in the city area including the big parks but i don't drive and my dad will not drive half an hour just so i can climb trees. he's not bothered by me climbing at all... if its that dangerous (which it isnt) he should be so the fact the isnt bothered shows that its not incredibly dangerous.



I don't drive is an excuss for not taking the bus out of town? You don't know how to use public tranportation? If you're depending on Dad to get you there. Maybe you need to grow a little independence and get on the bus. Ask Dad if it's okay to take the bus out to where the trees are?


----------



## sheep (Sep 9, 2006)

moss, what are you thinking about? im interested.
one time, my school took us out to climb trees and they used a system that would be able to catch me if i fell (and also support me if i really can't climb) but I found it cumbersome and clumsy. i think that's actually what made me get really annoyed at "aid climbing". Also, setting everything up was a pain not to mention that the straps hurt my boobs.  

and geofore, what exactly is your definition of high?
(and one of my excuses include how my dad freaked out when i went to a city park no more than a 20 minute walk away from my house. there are family problems and now he's paranoid. I'm too busy to go out secretly when he's not watching. god i miss the days when everything was happy and i was allowed to wonder around the worst parts of the city after midnight... now i'm reduced to being a 10yr old.)


----------



## geofore (Sep 11, 2006)

*buddy system*

That's why you take a buddy with you when you climb. Protection in numbers. You get a couple of your friends to go with you. Most of the trees I deal with are under 125' tall. In town most are around 50'-75' tall. Tall is 110'+ in Pa. I have a place not far from Cooks Forrest where you can still find trees 150'+. Most of the tall trees were taken way back when Pa. was clearcut in the 1800's.


----------



## moss (Sep 11, 2006)

sheep said:


> moss, what are you thinking about? im interested.
> one time, my school took us out to climb trees and they used a system that would be able to catch me if i fell (and also support me if i really can't climb) but I found it cumbersome and clumsy. i think that's actually what made me get really annoyed at "aid climbing".



I'm thinking a lightweight minimal rock climbing saddle and a 25-30 ft. lanyard made from 11mm arborist rope. The lanyard is adjustable length with a prusik built-in. The lanyard has a locking carabiner on both ends. When you're in a questionable situation in the tree put the lanyard over a strong branch (6" diameter or better) and attach both 'biners to the center attachment on the rock harness. As you free climb through the dangerous spot tighten up the slack on the lanyard to minimize shock loading if you fall. Once you get a solid perch take the lanyard off the branch and flip it over the next one.

Using a rock saddle it will be very uncomfortable to hang in the saddle for very long but it could save you from a fall. If you are interested in testing out a lanyard like this let me know and we can figure out how to get you set up with one.
-moss


----------



## moss (Sep 11, 2006)

sheep said:


> one time, my school took us out to climb trees and they used a system that would be able to catch me if i fell (and also support me if i really can't climb) but I found it cumbersome and clumsy. i think that's actually what made me get really annoyed at "aid climbing". Also, setting everything up was a pain



Not to worry, no need for a cumbersome harness for a typical rec climbing setup  Some SRT climbers use a chest harness when they use a chest attached ascender and climbers who have a lot of body weight above their waist will sometimes use a chest harness to keep them more upright for DdRT climbing. The rest of us can get away with a waist belt and leg loop type harness, it doesn't get in the way of climbing at all. 
-moss


----------



## Fireaxman (Sep 11, 2006)

Andrew, you win my respect again. Proverbs 15:1; and "Constructive Suggestion" wins over up-front negativism most of the time (whenever there is Enough Time).


----------



## scottbaker (Sep 20, 2006)

I love to climb trees without any gear. I have been enjoying this kind of climbing since I was a kid. I still do it often and have favorite trees around here where I will sometimes go hang out or make phone calls.

My first rope was given to me by a contractor working for my folks. My friend and I used it to get into trees with branches we could not reach by tieing a loop and tossing it over a branch then we would work togewther to get one of us up. Then we would move the rope up a bit so the guy in the tree could assist as the second came up. My mother was always yelling at us from her wheelcahir "three points of contact!".

These days sometimes when traveling I will bring a short rope to assist in reaching the branches and I've used it on unfamiliar trees where downclimbing the hard moves at the base of the tree was unsettling. I just tie a bowline loop and sit in it to lower off.

I have no death wish and typically climb trees that have a lot of branch structure. I've not had a bad fall recently and often back off of trees that tempt me but prove to be too hard/risky.

As I have traveled around I've always been able to find a nice tree to climb without any fuss...or gear.

I have told my kids for years that if they do find me at the bottom of a tree, having made a fatal mistake, that they should go gather wood for a pyre.

I loved what Andrew had to say on this subject. Scott


----------



## SRT-Tech (Sep 20, 2006)

hmmm climb with no gear, fall and you get hurt. Yet how come freeclimbing is more socially acceptable than ascending from an overhead anchor point on a skinny rope (under tension)....? hmmmm.. weird indeed....

:bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:


----------



## redwood logger (Sep 20, 2006)

*Chain Climbing*

out here on the coast of CA. its pretty tough to free (or bear) climb our big 2nd growth and bigger old growth redwoods. It might sound strange but I climb with chain instead of rope flip line. I swithced over when wy wire core flip line was to short to make it around a 10 foot redwood, and I LIKED IT SO MUCH i NEVER WENT BACK !!!!!


----------



## Doctor Dave (Sep 20, 2006)

beowulf343 said:


> Depends on the definition of "free climbing." I've gone up a tree with my spikes and not bothered with my lanyard-this can be called free climbing. But climbing with no gear-never. Too many trees out there that are too hard to get up without at least a rope.



Me too. So, do I have to turn in my arborist credentials now? I'll occasionally deadwood and raise a fat second-growth ponderosa pine or Douglas fir by spiking up to the live crown (or even some big dead wood) without using my flip line, 'cause it gets caught on very little stub, and then free climb without using the spikes until I tie in up top, to clean the tree on the way down. I barely hit the cambium here and there (the bark is 2-4 in. thick), and the pitch seals off the wounds. I really don't consider it a big deal--the spikes or the free climbing. I basically use my flipline as a back up line, and when I tie in (I also always take up a short adjustable lanyard). 

So, beat the crap out of me for spiking a pruning job.


----------



## treebogan (Sep 21, 2006)

*Yeah,I've done it too*

I was a bit shocked when working in the P.N.W and guys would climb firs and Ceders with spikes to Deadwood etc,but like you said the bark is so thick as to cause few problems.I too often gain the first branch without having my flip line around the tree,especially on trees like Cotton wood where there are so may deep fissures in the bark that you can grasp them firmly.Ivy covered trees are also bloody near impossible to flip your line around.Chain flipline eh?Snap link at one end?how do you adjust it?I'll give it a go,be cheaper than a wire cored one.


----------



## Doctor Dave (Sep 21, 2006)

treebogan said:


> I was a bit shocked when working in the P.N.W and guys would climb firs and Ceders with spikes to Deadwood etc,but like you said the bark is so thick as to cause few problems.I too often gain the first branch without having my flip line around the tree,especially on trees like Cotton wood where there are so may deep fissures in the bark that you can grasp them firmly.Ivy covered trees are also bloody near impossible to flip your line around.Chain flipline eh?Snap link at one end?how do you adjust it?I'll give it a go,be cheaper than a wire cored one.



I use a wire-core flip line that runs through a Petzl ascender on one side, and just clip to the other. Works great---you can adjust with one hand. One problem--- I have an 8 ft. flip line, but I need a 12 ft. as well. So, I found myself free climbing the butt, and then deciding, what the hell, it's just another 10 or 20 ft. The dicey part is taking one hand off the tree (and then the other) to clip in your flip line if you run out of nice deep-creviced bark to grab before you reach the crown.

I wouldn't hook cedars, they actually have thin bark.

Someday I'll get a bow or fishing rod set up to shoot my line (or a big ladder). I made a set of jumars on webbing that I have occasionally use to climb my rope into big oaks and a huge plane tree where I didn't have my feet on the trunk. It's just about impossible to throw a line through a branchy conifer crown, up around 30 ft or more where you might get your first decent branch. Of course, some have open crowns and aren't that bad, and I could get a workout hip-thrusting or footlocking.


----------



## redwood logger (Sep 21, 2006)

*Chain Flipline*

My chain is hooked to the right hand side D ring, then it goes around behind me and is hooked to the left D ring, then it continues for 20 ft. or so (however long you want it) Thats the part that goes around the tree. There are two snaps hooked up to the right side D along with that end of the chain. There are two so that you can take up slack with one or the other and you always have one still hooked up. You can use that same method to pass over limbs also. These snaps are just hardware store items and do not have screw locks on them, but you are using two so the chances are pretty slim that they would both come un hooked at the same time. The chain makes a full circle behind me so that i can un hook the chain from the D rings on both sides and render myself around the tree without moving the chain. this is some times needed (not very often) because it is possible for a chain flipline to half hitch around a stub on the back side of the tree. that is a real problem mostly in old growth redwoods(or any other big tree), that is why you need to be able to render yourself on the chain. When you flip a chain that flip will carry a lot further around a big tree. I think rope is the way to go for small trees, but chain for the biggun's. Of course you would not want to use chain around power lines. Some people put down chain because they say it is only as strong as its weakest link. that is true, so make sure you get a chain you know you can trust! I am not saying chain is the right way to climb or the safest way, but it works for me! Gotta go got 2 tree jobs waitin on me!


----------



## Doctor Dave (Sep 21, 2006)

redwood logger said:


> My chain is hooked to the right hand side D ring, then it goes around behind me and is hooked to the left D ring, then it continues for 20 ft. or so (however long you want it) Thats the part that goes around the tree. There are two snaps hooked up to the right side D along with that end of the chain. There are two so that you can take up slack with one or the other and you always have one still hooked up. You can use that same method to pass over limbs also. These snaps are just hardware store items and do not have screw locks on them, but you are using two so the chances are pretty slim that they would both come un hooked at the same time. The chain makes a full circle behind me so that i can un hook the chain from the D rings on both sides and render myself around the tree without moving the chain. this is some times needed (not very often) because it is possible for a chain flipline to half hitch around a stub on the back side of the tree. that is a real problem mostly in old growth redwoods(or any other big tree), that is why you need to be able to render yourself on the chain. When you flip a chain that flip will carry a lot further around a big tree. I think rope is the way to go for small trees, but chain for the biggun's. Of course you would not want to use chain around power lines. Some people put down chain because they say it is only as strong as its weakest link. that is true, so make sure you get a chain you know you can trust! I am not saying chain is the right way to climb or the safest way, but it works for me! Gotta go got 2 tree jobs waitin on me!




Must be a bummer when you through the chain around the tree and it hits you in the face


----------



## moss (Sep 23, 2006)

SRT-Tech said:


> hmmm climb with no gear, fall and you get hurt. Yet how come freeclimbing is more socially acceptable than ascending from an overhead anchor point on a skinny rope (under tension)....? hmmmm.. weird indeed....
> 
> :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:



 You're mixing apples and oranges with free climbing and light gear technique. 

When you propose a radical gear change to professional climbers who have been using equipment and techniques that have evolved gradually over a long period of time you are going to get resistance. Nothing changes fast in roped tree climbing. And for good reason. Every new life support technique must be gradually used and tested to gain acceptance. Generally speaking pro climbers look to their leading climbers for innovation. People look to those who have earned respect over time to come up with acceptable new technique. It's a matter of trust related to keeping yourself alive at work. It doesn't mean that newcomers can't contribute but they'll have to work harder to get their ideas into practice.

Back to free climbling. Free climbing is what it is. Humans have done it for thousands of years and won't stop now. For working arborists free climbing is a life limiting concept. For rec climbers free climbing is not recommended by the instructors out there. It is limited and unsafe for most trees. Some rec climbers just like to jump into a tree and climb once in a while. It's a matter of skill and risk management. It can be done safely, it's up to each individual to climb responsibly if they are going to free climb. There are many other activities with similar risk that are widely practiced, like bouldering, surfing, driving a car (more risky), riding a bike (even more risky), eating at a restaurant (very risky) etc. etc.
-moss


----------



## beowulf343 (Sep 23, 2006)

moss said:


> Back to free climbling. Free climbing is what it is. Humans have done it for thousands of years and won't stop now. For working arborists free climbing is a life limiting concept. For rec climbers free climbing is not recommended by the instructors out there. It is limited and unsafe for most trees. Some rec climbers just like to jump into a tree and climb once in a while. It's a matter of skill and risk management. It can be done safely, it's up to each individual to climb responsibly if they are going to free climb. There are many other activities with similar risk that are widely practiced, like bouldering, surfing, driving a car (more risky), riding a bike (even more risky), eating at a restaurant (very risky) etc. etc.
> -moss


True. Freeclimbing for rec climbers is not as big a deal as it is for professional climbers. Rec climbers climb maybe three or four trees a month-odds are nothing bad is going to happen. But for guys like myself, three or four trees barely takes me to lunch on an average day. The odds are much higher something bad is going to happen the more you climb. Yeah, nothing bad has happened the last however many trees you freeclimbed, but the odds are getting worse the longer you do it.


----------

