# OSHA demands chaps in trees,portlandOR



## coydog (Apr 21, 2004)

Our company just recieved a surprise OSHA inspection, among other things, they are demanding that we wear chaps when operating a chainsaw while climbing, despite anzi Z-133,which makes the distinction between working on the ground and aloft. This is in portland,OR . anybody else had similar experiences recently?


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 21, 2004)

> _Originally posted by coydog _
> * despite anzi Z-133,which makes the distinction between working on the ground and aloft. *



Those boneheads. I'd ask them to demonstrate how to wear chaps on their chests.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 21, 2004)

A call to TCIA seems to be in order.

Do you have the regulation number that you're being cited for?

Tom


----------



## arboromega (Apr 21, 2004)

did anyone question this guy when he mentioned having to wear the chaps?


----------



## coydog (Apr 21, 2004)

i don't personally know the regulation #, I'll find out more in the days to come. I'm a foreman for this company, which is the most safety minded company i've ever worked for, we also recieved a citation for storing a gas can in the shop. OSHA did not care about ANSI, they supercede them, unless we can negotiate something through the appeals process, it will be company policy to climb with chaps.


----------



## Timothy M Walsh (Apr 21, 2004)

I concur with Tom. If your company is a member of TCIA, give them a call. 

I would also like to know how they are citing your company. They should be referring to ANSI Z133.1 –2000, if not, they need to have a specific reason why not.

I have just spent two days with OSHA Compliance Officers in New England trying to get them to understand our standard and why they should be using it. I can only assume that your citation was out of ignorance.

If you would like some assistance with this, please email me and we can discuss it further.

Thanks,

TMW

[email protected]

PS I have told some compliance officers about this and am trying to find a way to resolve this issue quickly.


----------



## murphy4trees (Apr 21, 2004)

I wore chaps while climbing awhile back... no biggie... and it kept my pants real clean, sawdust out of the climber pads and looked cool according to one of my client's teenage sons... 
I'd like to see the stats on saw injuries below the belt while aloft... it makes sense that they would be way below ground injuries... you just don't operate a saw down by your legs that much when climbing... Show me that it makes my life significantly safer and I'll do it in a heartbeat... I remember Big Jon commenting on my using chaps... something to the effect that it was overkill... They weren't that inconvenient and I really liked how clean they kept my pants...


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 21, 2004)

I've had discussions with arbos from UK and Europe where they have to wear leg protection whenever they use a saw. It is rare to have a chainsaw injury below the waist in the tree. 

On first blush, this seems like an overzealous or misinformed inspector. I hope things work out for the company.

Tom


----------



## Rob Murphy (Apr 22, 2004)

*Chian saw pants*

I climb all the time in chain saw pants cause iam i a cooler part of OZ and i dont like takeing things on an off all day.Boy it wears them out quickly thougth.Climbing in chaps would be DUMB.We have to have leg protection at all times when using a saw.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Apr 22, 2004)

Rob, aren't the last two sentences in contradiction to each other?


----------



## NYCHA FORESTER (Apr 22, 2004)

HEY! I'm a public employee, and you are right, most of them are useless clock watchers.


----------



## Rob Murphy (Apr 22, 2004)

MB....Yep. Its bad enough some times to climb in sawpants(cutproofs) let alone chaps..but I have done it..it is DUMB. I like to keep minimalist


----------



## Burnham (Apr 22, 2004)

Coy--Was it state or federal OSHA?


----------



## xtremetrees (Apr 22, 2004)

> _Originally posted by RockyJSquirrel _
> *Government employees, for the most part, are morons who leech off of society under the guise of 'public servant'. Fact is, most are too stupid to make it in the private sector and put in their time at a gummint job mostly for the security of a job for life with great benifits and little chance of being fired no matter how inept they might be.
> Some people are able to schmooze these morons in order to avoid difficulties which these idiots can easily create with a single piece of paper. Right and wrong mean nothing, the only important thing is making sure everyone locksteps in time and follows all the stupid rules mandated by other morons who have no working knowledge of the industries they regulate.
> 
> ...




Thats tellin it how it is
Right on Rocky


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 22, 2004)

I wonder how much of this stereotyping of public employees could be leveled against "most" of the people who work for a living, either public or private?

Spending some time in a room of mirrors or echo canyon is humbling. 




Tom


----------



## Burnham (Apr 22, 2004)

Rocky, you and I have been down this road before...I suppose we will always disagree on the subject, but some days I can't just sit still and be pooped on, any more than you can, so I'll just say...you could not be more wrong. You too, xtreme. 

 

Now I feel better.

:angel:


----------



## xtremetrees (Apr 22, 2004)

Sorry bro,
Didnt mean to offend. But chainsaw chaps in the trees???
If I get cut anywhere it would be on my arms. In the trees I mean.
And I've been cut at 80 feet on my arm in the trees rapelled down in a hurry before I passed out and ran out of rope, had to wait while my bud tied on another rope and let me down. Other climber across the monster tree said "hey man he's leaking all over you." Again sorry bro.


----------



## Burnham (Apr 22, 2004)

Xtreme--I don't disagree with you about the saw chaps in-tree. It's just the attitude that public employees have a monopoly on idiocy and laziness that offends me. Thanks.


----------



## ROLLACOSTA (Apr 22, 2004)

we climbers in the UK have had too wear protective trousers when climbing for years,and our regulations require us to wear alround protection ...very uncomfortable and hot at first but you soon get used to it..and nowadays i wouldn't consider ever using a saw without leg protection or boots with protection


----------



## trees4life (Apr 22, 2004)

We have to wear 'leg protection' at all times when using a chain saw. Many companies do not permit climbing in chaps, so climbers tend to wear pants or overalls with leg protection. 

I understand problems with regulations being put in place, but most are as a resulst somebody (I believe usually many somebodys) having done something stupid or careless. Since you can't regulate stupidity, negligence or carelessness, you have to regulate safety for everyone. The problem with not wearing leg protection at all times, is that many climbers neglect to put chaps on when they return to the ground & use a chainsaw. It may be a PITA, but a fact of life today.


----------



## rb_in_va (Apr 22, 2004)

> _Originally posted by TreeCo _
> *Rocky may be a bit harsh but he's not far off the mark concerning OSHA and gov't employees.*



Agree with Rocky on this. I work for a govt organization as a contractor and have seen some of the dumbest, wasteful things it just blows my mind. When I was on a ship in the Navy, they used to throw tons of surplus stuff overboard (some of it new) just because it was easier than getting rid of it in port. I once saw them throw a brand new $80k valve overboard. Also, it probably doesn't help that the worst people are the ones that get the most publicity. For instance, I just got back from doing some business at city hall, and everyone there was very courteous and helpful (never mind the fact that I was there to get a permit for a yard sale!) but I didn't think anything of it. However, if someone were rude or given me a hard time, I would have been ranting about it for days. All in all though, I think the govt attracts a fair number of useless people, but there are good ones out there too. I have thought for some time that govt needs to go through a major change in the way it works. They don't need to trim the budget so much as change the way the budget is formulated. Anyone who has worked with govt knows that at the end of the fiscal year there is a scramble to spend all the money thats left over so as not to lose it next year. That's ludicrous. It's the culture that fosters this kind of thinking that needs to change. JMO, sorry for the rambling post.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Apr 22, 2004)

Part of the problem is the union-managemnt format. Unions are set up to protect every worker, no matter how worthless they are. It takes endless record keeping and meetings to get the deadwood trimmed out, so no one wants to take the effort and grief associated.

Of course, we the public only see/remember the guys leaning on thier shovels every time we go by.

I would assume Burnhams line of work, as with firefighters attracts a more proffesional bread of person.

Don't get too hard on Xtream, he's in the Army and knows a lot about lazy, nogood, layabout, goldbricks.


----------



## Rob Murphy (Apr 22, 2004)

*One handed*



> _Originally posted by ROLLACOSTA _
> *we climbers in the UK have had too wear protective trousers when climbing for years,and our regulations require us to wear alround protection ...very uncomfortable and hot at first but you soon get used to it..and nowadays i wouldn't consider ever using a saw without leg protection or boots with protection *


I heard that the were two accidents where UK climbers got kickback into the neck. It was two do with one handed use. Yuo can only coverup so much.


----------



## jamie (Apr 22, 2004)

*pants*

ive moved up from a medium to large type c....the mediums kept ripping in the crotch....so i now look like a clown....big down point about the larger size is when you sweat the material is looser so slaps around more.....

i like the feeling of security if it all goes wrong....even if its just my legs

jamie


----------



## ROLLACOSTA (Apr 22, 2004)

ROB weve had all types of accidents overhere like you say you cant cover up everything but i would bet that a large proportion of injurys are cuts to legs:


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 22, 2004)

INstead of focusing on employee ambition or motivation, look at the implications of education. It might be a case where the inspector needs to be educated about the industry regulations. Go back into the archives and read all of the moaning about stupid people in the tree business. Wasn't there a thread recently about educating groundies? 

Until we know what regulation is being cited, we have no clue whether the citation is valid. 

In some places inspectors are using the logging standard with arbos. As a result of the work that TCIA has done to educate the OSHA inspectors those citations have been reduced. This is a place where non-members have benefited from the dues paying members of TCIA. I'm one of those riding on the shirt tails. I haven't been a NAA/TCIA member for quite a while. 

There will be a time in the near future that Americans will be required to wear leg protection any time that a chain saw is used. Including in the trees. 

Tom


----------



## jamie (Apr 22, 2004)

*sensible*

in my opinion it makes sense...i can see a lot of you stateside feeling that it 'infringes on your freedom'

jamie


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Apr 22, 2004)

How would a sole proprietor with no employees respond to an inspector entering his jobsite?


----------



## Rob Murphy (Apr 22, 2004)

*Re: pants*



> _Originally posted by jamie _
> *ive moved up from a medium to large type c....the mediums kept ripping in the crotch....so i now look like a clown....big down point about the larger size is when you sweat the material is looser so slaps around more.....
> 
> 
> jamie *


 Yeh...I have a pair like that too..Its a 'cool' look though ...just carry a SK8 board


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 22, 2004)

John,

That is one that would be good to run by OSHA from a phone booth. I could see an inspector writing a citation and leaving you to sort out the mess. Even if the fine went away in the end it would be a waste of production time. 

Does anyone know of this happening?

Tom


----------



## MasterBlaster (Apr 22, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tom Dunlap _
> *
> 
> There will be a time in the near future that Americans will be required to wear leg protection any time that a chain saw is used. Including in the trees.
> ...




Great. More rules and regs.

Whut an awesome concept.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 22, 2004)

Be glad that the regs will come out of the ANSI committee and not from OSHA Butch.

Does anyone else know of any in-tree chainsaw cuts? The only one's that I know of first hand, so to speak, are nips to fingers. Neither that serious. Less than a dozen stiiches to skin, no meat cuts. Oh...knock on wood, I've never gotten cut from a running chain saw. 

Tom


----------



## MasterBlaster (Apr 22, 2004)

Most cuts incured by climbers are probably from their handsaws, I'd bet. I know thats the case with me... two chainsaw cuts on the ground, none in the tree.

But, that could change tomorrow...


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Apr 22, 2004)

All the ones I know of are from (Pros that were hurt) bumping a sharp cutter while moving around in the tree. I think that is what happened to Chad last year in VA. I've done that a number of times.

I do know of one idiot who was standing aon a small silvermaple branch, running a bigger saw with a slack climbing line and no other point of contact.

The small limb he was one broke and his watch saved the function in his hand. Needed some reconstructive surgury though.


----------



## a_lopa (Apr 22, 2004)

i totally agree with rocky,i really wonder who is talking safety sometimes i wear chainsaw pants all day everyday regardless climbing or not its when you have been in the game a while that you really need to be consious


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Apr 22, 2004)

I know 5 or 6 people who wear sawpants all the time they are working.


----------



## coydog (Apr 22, 2004)

this is oregon OSHA, who apparently have their own rules in addition to federal. Yes we are TCIA members and are arguing our case, however ( and i don't have a regulation # at this point) apparently this has been an Oregon OSHA rule since 1999 specifically for arbos working in trees. News to us, we have always followed ansi Z-133 as a standard as do every other respctable oregon tree company i know of, and I've never seen or heard of anyone wearing leg protection while climbing because it was required. I know of some climbers that do out of preference, but no one I've talked to was even aware of the state regulations. some other new things : no chipping unless at least TWO people ON THE GROUND in VISUAL CONTACT. I don't know about you guys, but when i'm on a two man crew i expect the brush to disappear as i work the tree, but no more, now i can look forward to doing a massive removal or prune job with chaps or saw pants on in the heat of summer and coming down to a mountain of brush to cleanup. Or maybe if it's in a tight area I'll just come down out of the tree to help chip five or six times. Or maybe it will just have to be a three man crew for a job that could heve easily been handled by two. We also have to wear Hi Vis orange shirts or reflective vests whenever working within10' of a road, any road , quiet neighborhood cul-de-sacs included. NO HAULING UP OF ANY GEAR WITH YOUR CLIMBING LINE, a second line SHALL be installed to send up any equipment including, but not limited to, climbing saw, pole pruner, block or pulley, etc. etc. What all comes of this remains to be seen, but oregon arborists beware.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Apr 22, 2004)

*OSHA can bite my butt!*

I mean that in a nice way!

:angel:




I am my own OSHA.


----------



## Rob Murphy (Apr 22, 2004)

*Heat exhaustion*

I had a guy on my crew drop from heat stroke one summer...that would be a extra danger.General exhaustion would constitute a danger .
WARNING..Wearing saftey gear does not nessisarily make you safe.Just ask anyone working near me


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 22, 2004)

The Oregon rules scream union tree trimming. The union would have the political skills and free time to make it happen. The union was pushing for 3 man crews when I was part of it. They said it was for safety, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out it would increase their dues by 1/3. Also the line to pull up gear sounds like a lineman thing, and most union reps representing the tree trimmers were linemen. 


I can live with high vis orange t-shirts and chainsaw pants. The pull line and 2 guys at the chipper is horsecrap.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Apr 22, 2004)

*Re: Guess who makes the rules.*



> _Originally posted by caretaker791 _
> *If you provide testimony for them ,,many times they will change their course of action because of it. *


So you're saying, if you become part of the process you might make it better??? :jester: Radical concept; I hope people are listening. At the very least, that'd give them a right to complain.


----------



## Rob Murphy (Apr 22, 2004)

*Stats*

I0 fatalities( none tree related), 6000 injuries so far this year ( all industries)in our little State of 450,000.Thats why we have REGS for OH&S.


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 23, 2004)

I got to meet the german version of OSHA here today. He watched me knock the top out of a linden.

I expressed a few of my safety concerns and safety practices that I found self defeating. It was nice to give my .02. Better than a spazfest online.

The inspector is in the green hat

I don't like steel being mandatory. I also don't like it being mandatory w/microcender. The complete metal circle makes a potential AR *very* difficult.


----------



## Burnham (Apr 23, 2004)

Nate--We use the same protocol in the FS, and the answer we have come up with to that AR problem is to pack a small set of bolt cutters in each team's rescue pack. I've tried them on an old 7/8 in. manila cable core and it worked fine, though not as clean as you'd like. They'd also handle any biner or screwlink you might use to attach the microcender to your harness, or the D ring, for that matter. Might be worth a thought, if only for peace of mind.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 23, 2004)

For Nate and Burnham,

Do you have to use steel core line and hard connections when you do takedowns or when you use a chain saw? 

Nate,

I see two thick books on the table by the inspector. Are those the "OSHA rule books" ?

Tom


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 23, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nathan Wreyford _
> *
> I don't like steel being mandatory. I also don't like it being mandatory w/microcender. The complete metal circle makes a potential AR very difficult. *



So, what are you supposed to use around powerlines?


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 23, 2004)

Here's a link to the Oregon OSHA site. Our special rules are under Subdivision R - Tree and Shrub services. 
http://www.cbs.state.or.us/external/osha/standards/div_2.htm


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 23, 2004)

Interesting rules...

"Pole pruners, pole saws, and other similar tools shall be equipped with wood or nonmetallic poles. Actuating cord shall be of nonconducting material."

No ARS or Silky pole saws then


"Climbing Ropes shall be used when working aloft in trees. Climbing ropes shall have a minimum diameter of 1/2-inch and be a 3 or 4 strand first-grade manila with a nominal breaking strengh of 2385 pounds or its equivalent in strength and durability. Synthetic rope shall have a maximum elasticity of not more than 7 percent."

No Fly?

"The opening or height of the notch shall be approximately 2-1/2 inches for each foot in diameter of the tree."

No open faces?


----------



## coydog (Apr 23, 2004)

today the new regs really hit me in the field. i've already decided that i can get used to the chaps, but until further notice we can't operate the chipper unless two workers are on the ground and in visual contact of one another, that being said I was assigned a removal and another afternoon job with one helper. We should have been rolling from the removal job by lunch, but when i hit the ground at 11:00 the back yard, the neighbors yard, and the front yard was one big brush pile.we didn't get out of there until 1:30, and were subsequently late to our second job, and made a long day out of what should have been a short one. This was a relatively small and easy removal too, it just doesn't really work to send a two man crew anymore if one of us can't chip the brush being sent down.


----------



## MasterBlaster (Apr 23, 2004)

Man, thats freaking insane! No wonder I'm a outlaw!


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 23, 2004)

"...3 or 4 strand first-grade manila with a nominal breaking strengh of 2385 pounds or its equivalent in strength and durability. ..."

Where does this come from? I'll bet that there are only a handful of people on this forum who have ever in their career climbed on or even used natural fiber ropes. 2,385# How about coming out of caveman times?

I'm glad that I don't have to work in OR.

Tom


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 24, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tom Dunlap _
> *"...3 or 4 strand first-grade manila with a nominal breaking strengh of 2385 pounds or its equivalent in strength and durability. ..."
> 
> Where does this come from? *



It's out of the Oregon OSHA Rules For Tree and Shrub Services.

I was wrong...again. The inspector isn't a bonehead. He is just enforcing outdated rules.

Here's another gem. "Safety belts or tree-trimming saddle belts shall conform to ANSI A10.14-1975........or a saddle formed by a double bowline shall be worn to protect workers when working aloft."

Time for a change


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 24, 2004)

Sounds like the Oregon arbos have the opportunity to work with the state OSHA to get their out-dated regs updated to, at least, the latest ANSI Z133 version. 

Tom


----------



## Stumper (Apr 24, 2004)

> How would a sole proprietor with no employees respond to an inspector entering his jobsite?


JPS
Well John, here is my scenario.
"Hello sir!" 
............
"You want what? I'm sorry but you seem to be confused. I am just an individual minding my own business."
...........
"I'm sorry sir, I need to get back to work."
........*&$#! 
"Sir, this is private property. I deny you any jurisdiction over myself or my property. Please leave immediately or I will call the sherriff."
*&#$!............*&^%#$%!...............*&[email protected]&%$$^^$&&.......... 
'Sigh'," Sir, I would not hurt thee for the world but thou standest where I am about to fell this tree"-Waaaaaagh wauughhhhhhh rev, rev


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 24, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tom Dunlap _
> *There will be a time in the near future that Americans will be required to wear leg protection any time that a chain saw is used. Including in the trees.
> *



I think so too. That or insurance companies will wise up and not pay for preventable chainsaw injuries. 

Here, if you get cut due to the fact you had no chainsaw pants, you are on your own paying for medical and workers comp benefits. 

To me it seems that overkill on chainsaw protection breeds complacency. Most workers I see here suit up and act like they are 100% protected, forgetting that they have a flesh eating machine in their hands. All the chainsaw gear in the world can't replace the most valuable piece of safety gear which is between your ears.


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 24, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tom Dunlap _
> *For Nate and Burnham,
> 
> Do you have to use steel core line and hard connections when you do takedowns or when you use a chain saw?
> ...



Here it is mandatory to use steel core and hard connections. The inspector allowed soft connections though he heavily frowned on them.

The rule books are pretty slim. The info is pretty straight forward. 


Bolt cutters are a good idea on a rescue bag. I would just hate to have to ascend with them. Ascending (footlock) with 180-200ft of rope and a few redirects is already hard. I would hate to pack bolt cutters too. When accidents happen, biners get crossed, gates get blocked, or some what side loaded.

After making several rescues this week, I can say that it is much harder than it seems to those who have never done it. To those who have never practiced and say, "I would blah...", they are just like homeowners who claim they would have done it themselves but didn't have a rope.

BTW Burnham, we used live "victims"


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 24, 2004)

Nte,

ARe the "patients" [I don't like to use the v-word  ] belayed by a second rope or are there other procedures in place to prevent an accident?

Tom


----------



## TimberMcPherson (Apr 25, 2004)

Chainsaw pants and chaps have been the law here for god knows how long. I think more widespread use of chainsaw pants by arborists in the US will be a good thing as it is here. 

They take a little getting used to especially in summer but the eventually become part of your work uniform and the public slowly get to recognise your an arborist due to the pants you wear. (as well as being able to spot arborist from hacks and lawn cutters around town) You spot the hacks around town as they are the ones in jeans.

Oh if you have a wet dish towel fight you have nothing to fear.


----------



## a_lopa (Apr 25, 2004)

99%of saw users have chainsaw pants,its the day you dont wear them


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 25, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Tom Dunlap _
> *Nte,
> 
> ARe the "patients" [I don't like to use the v-word  ] belayed by a second rope or are there other procedures in place to prevent an accident?
> ...



Patients are required to come down on their own system. By that I mean the 2 were not seperated and the patient just pulled his/her own hitch. These were the instructors and obviously comfortable coming down on one system.


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 25, 2004)

Patient secured upright


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 25, 2004)

Patient safely on ground

There was an instructor in the tree also to make sure nobody did anything too stupid.


----------



## Burnham (Apr 26, 2004)

Tom--We use cable core whenever we are on spurs, or whenever we use any cutting tool, be it handsaw, chainsaw, girdling blade, or even just a knife. The theory behind the use with spurs is to remove the possibility of seriously damaging the lanyard as it's tail hangs down beside your foot.

Nate--From what I hear, we are one of the few US organizations that practice aerial rescue with live patients. And Tom, we do not use a second belay system for this. However, we do place an instructor close by in the tree to oversee everything, and we belay the descent line from the ground. In over thirty years of doing this we have never had an incident where either the rescuer or the rescuee had their safety compromised. But never get complacent...

Gentlemen--For what it's worth, I can report that Oregon OSHA recognizes that their rules need review and have approached the USFS to assist in updating them. This action in part resulted from the falling fatality of a private contractor working a BLM climbing contract, and a near fatal fall by another contractor working a FS climbing contract, both last year. I have been asked to join a group of "stakeholders" representing the industry, and will do my best to give input that reflects a realistic approach to safe tree climbing/working operations. Wish me luck.


----------



## NickfromWI (Apr 26, 2004)

Why is the patient allowed to tend their own hitch? If they could do that, couldn't they just rescue themselves?

I know it's not that easy....what are the other things to consider here?

love
nick


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by NickfromWI _
> *Why is the patient allowed to tend their own hitch? If they could do that, couldn't they just rescue themselves?
> *



We would try to make it more realistic but couldn't find volunteers that would let us cut them with an ms200 and then knock them unconscious.

Lovey, it is practice, not a real situation. Consider it an invisible arm. We were taught to disconnect the patient's system after loading them onto our system. They couldn't find anyone who would insure them if they allowed the 2nd system to be disconnected.


----------



## NickfromWI (Apr 26, 2004)

But why let the patient tend their own hitch? Why not make the rescuer do it...that'd be more realistic. 

love
nick


----------



## jamie (Apr 26, 2004)

*resuce*

when i learnt o climb we had to tend both hitches, in the their rope is damaged scenario we had to attach them to us, release the tension on the rope and then remove their hitch from their rope (pretend that it was cut) and then descend with both of us on one rope.....and one hitch.....bloody scary when you have to watch what someone is doing and tell them.....no dont do that......

fun.....i reckon everyone should do areial rescue....the tree climbers companion should have it as well

in my test i was hanging and the examinber shouted up, what have you done....i replied with ehhhh, cut my leg off.....he said well if you have cut your leg off yopu would be screaming so scream.....i screamed as the rescuer footlocked up my rope(srt style on a prussic, for what its worth then descended us both on the same rope, tending my hitch and his ......

and i was screaming all the way through it

jamie


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Nathan Wreyford _
> *Lovey, it is practice, not a real situation. Consider it an invisible arm. We were taught to disconnect the patient's system after loading them onto our system. They couldn't find anyone who would insure them if they allowed the 2nd system to be disconnected. *



Lovey, read the above, we were taught to disconnect their system AFTER securing them into our system.

More realistic would be disconnecting their system but insurance wouldn't allow it.

I feel like I am repeating myself


----------



## Nathan Wreyford (Apr 26, 2004)

Our senarios took into account that their system was unavailable to get them to the ground. Mainly because they wanted to drill more for worst case senario. If you could use their hitch, then all you need to do it get to them and lower them on their own hitch.

We could not do 2 people on one hitch. With more advanced hitches, like vt, distel, etc - they can bind with the load of two. We both came down on an 8 with the hitch pulled loose, but as a back up.


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 26, 2004)

Burnham, Good luck. If there are any public meetings on the subject, I'll try to make it. 

General Tree Service in Portland did live rescues when I worked there. Quarterly was the goal. Asplundh crews were required to do live rescues once a month when I worked there, a few years back.


----------



## coydog (Apr 26, 2004)

We still do quarterly rescues in the catalpa tree.


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 26, 2004)

> _Originally posted by coydog _
> *We still do quarterly rescues in the catalpa tree. *



 Do you still get $50 for passing enough quarterly plant ID quizes? Doughnuts on Friday? Destress in the dirt lot accross the street? Definitely a 1st class Tree Company, the best I've seen.


----------



## coydog (Apr 26, 2004)

yep, yep, all of the above


----------



## Burnham (Apr 27, 2004)

Coydog, OR climber, other Oregon arborists, and the rest of you, too--I have been asked to provide information on current modern climbing practices, equipment, and techniques to OR-OSHA as a member of a "stakeholders" climbing rules advisory commitee. I don't know if the subject of chipper ops will come up, or if my input would be considered, but if the opportunity presents itself, I'd like to share your opinion of why a single operator is not a hazard to himself and others. The bottom line for these people will not be that it take an "extra" person to do the job. There has to be some argument based on changes to machine controls, etc. since the old rule was written to make a good case to change that rule. I have very minimal experience with chippers, so fill me in...solid reasons why one operator is safe.

Any other sore points you Oregon arborists are aware of in OR-OSHA rules, let me hear about them, too.


----------



## jamie (Apr 27, 2004)

*chippaz*

2 guys working the chipper in the eyes of those concerened about Health and Saftey is safer.....if something goes wrong there will be someone nearby who can provide assistance....

maybe try looking at theAFAG (Arboriculture and Forestry Advisory Group) leaflets

Maybe tryTreevolution as well. they act as an advisory body to HSE

we always try to have a couple chipping....having said that we are meant to have a second climber able to resuce the lead climber at a moments notice.....

jamie


----------



## murphy4trees (Apr 27, 2004)

Can't help you there...
having two people chipping is a safer way to go... I think a three man crew is safer too... anytime there is a man in the trees. That extra set of eyes can be a life saver.


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 27, 2004)

If law must cater to the lowest common denominator, at least give an exemption to owner/operators.


----------



## murphy4trees (Apr 27, 2004)

My understanding is that OSHA doesn't regulate owner operators.. If you work for yourself thay have no jurisdiction...


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 27, 2004)

Burnham, FWIW Here are the rules I would like to see changed.

4337-002-0308 Portable Power Tools

2) Gasoline-Driven Power Saws

(b) ".....employees shall be supported by their climbing belt or rope and by a safety line to a crotch in the tree higher than the climbers waistline..."

This should be updated to allow for using false crotches. How about tied in twice, but the climber chooses fliplines and/or lifeline. If the climber is working above there lifeline tie in, do they need 2 more tie ins? When I'm chunking out a spar sometimes I like my 2 fliplines slightly below my waist so I'm sure they are out of the way on the backside of the tree.

437-002-0309 Hand Tools

(2) Pruners and Hand Saws

(a) "Pole pruners, pole saws, and other similar tools shall be equipped with wood or nonmetallic poles" 

How about modifying this to trees within 10' of any energized lines. I want a Silky polesaw.

(9) Ropes.

(a) "....manilla.....2385 pounds..."

Obvious upgrade

(i) "A handline shall be used for raising or lowering tools..."

Why not be able to use a 6000lb test plus rope to raise hand tools? Requiring a seperate rope seems redundant.

437-002-0310 Work Procedures

(a) "...The climbing rope shall always be used....A safety strap or rope with snaps may be used for additional protection."

What's wrong with a flipline? Tied in is tied in. 

(c) "The climbing rope shall be passed around the trunk of the tree as high as possible using branches with a wide crotch."

Should be ammended to allow for false crotches. Also why set a rope at 100' to remove a limb 12' off the ground?

(f) "The climbing line shall be crotched...., and a taut line-hitch tied and checked."

Needs to be updated to allow for other friction hitches and approved mechanical tenders.

(d) " A seperate line shall be attached to limbs which cannot be dropped or are too heavy to be controlled by hand. The line shall be held by workers on the ground end of the rope...."

This doesn't allow for speedlines? Or hard locks, or self lowering. 

(5) Felling.

(f) "The opening or height of the notch shall be approximately 2-1/2 inches for each foot in diameter of the tree."

I would guess this was meant to prevent shallow notches leading to barberchairs. This doesn't allow for wide notches.

(6) Chipper equipment and operation.

Equipment Design

(c) Chippers without a mechanical infeed system must have:

(C) "A shut off switch within convenient reach of the worker feeding the chipper."

I hope walking the 3 steps to the side of the chipper is OK. Asplundh tried a kill brake bar on chuck n' ducks, they don't do it aanymore.


Work Practices

(j) The chipper operator must have a coworker in the immediate vicinity when feeding chipper.

Why?


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 27, 2004)

> _Originally posted by murphy4trees _
> *My understanding is that OSHA doesn't regulate owner operators.. If you work for yourself thay have no jurisdiction... *



Good deal


----------



## Stumper (Apr 27, 2004)

> My understanding is that OSHA doesn't regulate owner operators.. If you work for yourself thay have no jurisdiction...


 Daniel

Amen! While many of OSHA's guidelines are sensible and prudent, bureaucratic regulation and freedom are in terrible conflict. Thank God that in the midst of the mudslide that the erosion of freedom in America has become, individuals can still tell OSHA to take a running jump.


----------



## Guy Meilleur (Apr 28, 2004)

> _Originally posted by ORclimber _
> *Burnham, FWIW Here are the rules I would like to see changed.
> *


ORC, I see all "Shalls" and no "Shoulds". The arrogance of the govt bureaucracy blows my mind. Other arms of it forced me underground or at least under their radar, long ago.

Neither an employer nor an employee shall I anymore be; power to you guys trying to make the system work!


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 28, 2004)

A while ago the ANSI Z133 committee cleaned ub the soft language in the Z. Shoulds are not definitive. What do they mean? Instead of suggestions, the Z is a set of rules. If you want suggestions, read forums and make up your own rules. When the time comes to make a decision, the rule makers need a firm mark to measure from.

Tom


----------



## jmchristopher (Apr 28, 2004)

Seems like some confusion between chaps and integrated chain saw pants, like from Husquie. 
The bigger issue, by far, seems like fear and loathing of OSHA bureaucrats.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas (Apr 28, 2004)

> _Originally posted by jmchristopher _
> *
> The bigger issue, by far, seems like fear and loathing of OSHA bureaucrats. *



Big brother wouldn't have to step in, except the fatality and injury statistics are so high for our industry. 
Somebody mentioned letting us regulate our own industry with ANSI, but that hasn't worked, so here we go. OHSA has targeted us because we are simply so unsafe.


----------



## Tom Dunlap (Apr 28, 2004)

Mike's on the right track. ANSI writes [most] of the rules and OSHA enforces them [and their own too].

Tom


----------



## ORclimber (Apr 28, 2004)

Perhaps Oregon OSHA could refer to and follow the Z. 

IMO good safety rules are important. They can save lives.

They can get overzealous though. 

As far as 2 guys on the chipper... Assuming the rule is meant to keep people from getting chipped, shouldn't this suffice...

The chipper operator shall not stick any body part into the feed wheels or drum. The operator shall not place any body part closer than 24" to the feed wheel or drum. The chipper operator shall use a push stick when manipulating material on a running chipper within 24" of the feed wheel or drum.


----------



## Jumper (Apr 30, 2004)

> _Originally posted by TimberMcPherson _
> *Chainsaw pants and chaps have been the law here for god knows how long. I think more widespread use of chainsaw pants by arborists in the US will be a good thing as it is here.
> 
> They take a little getting used to especially in summer but the eventually become part of your work uniform and the public slowly get to recognise your an arborist due to the pants you wear. (as well as being able to spot arborist from hacks and lawn cutters around town) You spot the hacks around town as they are the ones in jeans.
> ...



Ditto for Canada, though two climbers I worked with did not wear them. One was a dope smoking rebel, plain and simple, and the other was a hack in jeans as described above, who spiked everything and did not know any better. Yes pants are a PITA in summer, and it does occasionally get as hot in Ontario as south Florida; I recall one day wearing the darn things when the humidex was almost 115F. Someone in this forum some time ago also extolled their virtues after falling off a bike. I can not imagine however wearing chaps in a tree, they seem a lot bulkier and less flexible than a good pair of pants, not to mention I think they would get hung up on things. So help you if you cut your legs in Canada and the Labour dorks determine you were not wearing PPE ie pants; zero compensation. I would rather cover my butt in more ways than one.


----------

