Saw techniques and cutting/felling safety

[clearance]

okay. now that i have stirred the bowl. has anyone arguing with me ever been trained by a pro? this includes GOL. Pro CUTS or what ever? marty

Whatever, the clear favorite, question is Marty, have you ever been trained by a pro?

 

[chainsawworld]

when i mentioned professional training i meant training that is recognized by our insurance companies. the training that gets the insurnce reductions.
i too started in the woods when i was 14. i had the best training from the old timers that had it together. times changed and cutting has become safer. less cutters are getting killed in the woods. not only training is to blame but people sitting in tin boxes(bell saws etc.) as well.
i am not going to be a chest pounder. training set up by guys like Soren Erikson sould hold some credit with Anyone that spends time in the woods.
marty

 

[chainsawworld]

as a matter of fact, Soren Erikson, Tim Ard and Bill Lindloff to start. recieved lots of other training since then. must be a reason why i instruct for the state of new york.

 

[joesawer]

You should see some of those trainers and insurance experts throw their a$$ in reverse when they come to some of my job sites.

 

[chainsawworld]

insurance companies contiune to seek better, safer methods in the woods to save lives and reduce pay-outs. maybe someone here should market what they are preaching and help us all out.

 

[clearance]

insurance companies contiune to seek better, safer methods in the woods to save lives and reduce pay-outs. maybe someone here should market what they are preaching and help us all out.

Uhh, I think some people here know how to fall, preachers should stay in churches, were they belong. So you had the "best training from old timers", but you also say "not only is training to blame..." Now what is it, how can you say you got the best training from old time fallers, like others here, and then say that training is to blame?

 

[joesawer]

Training is to blame???? To blame for what?
I don't think anyone here thinks training is bad. I think almost any training is better than no training.
One of the biggest things WC looks at for its rates is years of experiance and lost time injurys.
How many people go to college get a degree go to work in their field and have to relearn a lot.
Even the Army has its by the book and field expiediant way of doing things.

 

[Gologit]

insurance companies contiune to seek better, safer methods in the woods to save lives and reduce pay-outs. maybe someone here should market what they are preaching and help us all out.

That does it. I'm calling BS here. Not only have you skirted answering some our questions now you're claiming that insurance companies have our best interests at heart. BS...pure and simple. Insurance companies exist for one reason...to make a profit, just like any other company. Insurance companies are interested in making money and that's fine...just don't insult us by trying to tell us that the insurance companies care about us beyond the number of dollars we can put in thier pocket.

 

[joesawer]

That does it. I'm calling BS here. Not only have you skirted answering some our questions now you're claiming that insurance companies have our best interests at heart. BS...pure and simple. Insurance companies exist for one reason...to make a profit, just like any other company. Insurance companies are interested in making money and that's fine...just don't insult us by trying to tell us that the insurance companies care about us beyond the number of dollars we can put in thier pocket.

+1

maybe someone here should market what they are preaching and help us all out.
Today 05:53 PM
For starters Raise your back cut slightly above your face for 99.99* of all trees cut. And if you are "pounding wedges in a bore cut" of a foward leaner, please reconsider your whole felling theory.
Thats all I have time for now. Leaving in morning for two weeks to work on a USFS job.

 

[clearance]

+2 I know I was born at night, but not last night. What are you, some kind of insurance agent/"faller"?

 

[ShoerFast]

+2 I know I was born at night, but not last night. What are you, some kind of insurance agent/"faller"?

I'm thinking "Agent" only, if there were a way to buck the system, it would be to go against OSHA's ideas.

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/logging/manual/felling/cuts/cuts.html

As you know what would hold up in court.

 

[John Ellison]

Marty, you have stirred the pot.... and left it to burn with no one around to take it off.:yoyo:

 

[clearance]

I'm thinking "Agent" only, if there were a way to buck the system, it would be to go against OSHA's ideas.

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/logging/manual/felling/cuts/cuts.html

As you know what would hold up in court.

There are drawings on that site copied from the B.C. Compensation board book "Fallers and Buckers Manual". I mean directly copied, with no credit given. I recognize them plainly. Also, I never really clued into this open face deal before, I just thought is was a bigazz undercut, now I see it I think, who would waste thier time and waste valuable wood from the buttlog like that? oh yeah, "experts".

 

[smokechase II]

Not look up

Sorry about the tardiness of this response.
Back at post 42.

"During felling however, Soren believed it was not a good idea to look up to(o) much. His theory was that if a branch came out of the tree that he wanted it to land square on the top of the hardhat, and not in his face."

Guys, this is pretty silly.
If you are dealing with 60-80 foot tall trees that have somewhat smaller limbs that are going to have some wind resistance coming down. OK, you can probably get away with an occasional good smack or two. Tops come out of trees, limbs as big as your arm or leg will destroy a hard hat or what's below it. A hard hat needs to be looked at as a reasonable safety device. Certainly not a guarantee of safety. Like a seat belt. Also, do you value your shoulders?

A quick point is that the best way to avoid injury is to look up and ..... let's say it all together now ...... move out of the way.

Once again, the photo of an open face cutter, with superb hard hat protection is attached.

For the record, the attitudes by some in this thread, would be similar to the attitude Soren had when he came out to Washington in the late 1980's. That would be why he was basically laughed out of this neck of the woods. He didn't come out to work in the woods here for 5 years and then say, "Hey guys, try this!" He just started preaching what he was taught in a place where he was out of his league.

If I was to go to Scandinavia and spout off about Humboldt’s, should I be laughed out of those woods?
You bet! Si, como no!

There are many hazards in the woods. One of them is the "my way or the highway". Especially if it's from a foreigner to your locale.

 

[Tzed250]

Will looking up stop the branch from hitting you if it is 5 feet from you when you see it? If sight is the only way, then you must never take your eyes from the canopy. Is this how you cut?

 

[Gologit]

Sorry about the tardiness of this response.
Back at post 42.

"During felling however, Soren believed it was not a good idea to look up to(o) much. His theory was that if a branch came out of the tree that he wanted it to land square on the top of the hardhat, and not in his face."

Guys, this is pretty silly.
If you are dealing with 60-80 foot tall trees that have somewhat smaller limbs that are going to have some wind resistance coming down. OK, you can probably get away with an occasional good smack or two. Tops come out of trees, limbs as big as your arm or leg will destroy a hard hat or what's below it. A hard hat needs to be looked at as a reasonable safety device. Certainly not a guarantee of safety. Like a seat belt. Also, do you value your shoulders?

A quick point is that the best way to avoid injury is to look up and ..... let's say it all together now ...... move out of the way.

Once again, the photo of an open face cutter, with superb hard hat protection is attached.

For the record, the attitudes by some in this thread, would be similar to the attitude Soren had when he came out to Washington in the late 1980's. That would be why he was basically laughed out of this neck of the woods. He didn't come out to work in the woods here for 5 years and then say, "Hey guys, try this!" He just started preaching what he was taught in a place where he was out of his league.

If I was to go to Scandinavia and spout off about Humboldt’s, should I be laughed out of those woods?
You bet! Si, como no!

There are many hazards in the woods. One of them is the "my way or the highway". Especially if it's from a foreigner to your locale.

LOL....Good post. Maybe everybody on the left coast should put that guy on the "ignore" list and save on aggravation. Still gripes me though that some of the stuff he claims as gospel could get somebody hurt...or worse.

 

[John Ellison]

Maybe someone familiar with insurance claims can quote some stats on the number of fallers that are "hit from above" every year.
Of the accidents that I have been around, struck from above far outnumber the dreaded barberchair.

 

[clearance]

....GOL focuses on harvesting valuable trees. The emphasis is on safety, correct method, and efficiency.

O.K., explain to me how the 70 degree undercut is effecient, compared to say a 30 degree humboldt? And, if it is "valuable", how come you are taking such a big and unneeded chunk out of the butt? Wasting wood, wasting time, IMHO.

 

[ShoerFast]

There are drawings on that site copied from the B.C. Compensation board book "Fallers and Buckers Manual". I mean directly copied, with no credit given. I recognize them plainly. Also, I never really clued into this open face deal before, I just thought is was a bigazz undercut, now I see it I think, who would waste thier time and waste valuable wood from the buttlog like that? oh yeah, "experts".

Yes,
It has been a long time now, but it was drilled in as a kids that if you can't get at least an 8' log, you might as well cut it all for stove wood.

Back home, Minnesota, so many hardwoods could hardly grow 8' straight in any one direction, cheating the stump was the only thing you could do. We always had enough stove wood. It may have bucked safety issues, but there sure was a difference selling a 10' log instead of a 8' ,,or a 12' instead of a 10'

Cutting a shallow Dutchman before we knew they were called Dutchman, also can give a tree some time to commit to a direction. Quick logger math, if a tree is 50' tall, and a 12 deg notch, Fallow me here, 90 deg. is 50' , 45 deg is 25' , 23deg. is 12' ,,,,a 12deg notch will move that top 6' to commit to a direction,,,,,,,, most trees, 6 feet at the top is all that anyone would need before the best hedge would break anyways.

 

[clearance]

Yes,
It has been a long time now, but it was drilled in as a kids that if you can't get at least an 8' log, you might as well cut it all for stove wood.

Back home, Minnesota, so many hardwoods could hardly grow 8' straight in any one direction, cheating the stump was the only thing you could do. We always had enough stove wood. It may have bucked safety issues, but there sure was a difference selling a 10' log instead of a 8' ,,or a 12' instead of a 10'

Cutting a shallow Dutchman before we knew they were called Dutchman, also can give a tree some time to commit to a direction. Quick logger math, if a tree is 50' tall, and a 12 deg notch, Fallow me here, 90 deg. is 50' , 45 deg is 25' , 23deg. is 12' ,,,,a 12deg notch will move that top 6' to commit to a direction,,,,,,,, most trees, 6 feet at the top is all that anyone would need before the best hedge would break anyways.

You mean Humboldt, Shoe, Dutchmen isn't in this talk (thank God)