We have to start somewhere.
The ANSI document I speak of is merely the template for our efforts.
I suggested Z133.1 since at least some of it would indeed apply to recreational climbing.

When trying to hammer out a standard the hierarchy of headings, paragraphs, and sub-parts is very helpful in keeping things focused, one issue at a time.

Once the first draft is roughed-out, printed into hard copy, and mailed out to the standards committee members for comment and review, things will start to move forward.

It will be tricky to stay focused on developing a standard, not a club-members rule book.

Comments, criticisms, opinions, welcomed.

I think that trying to establish what recreational tree climbing "is" (and maybe what it "is not") is a good idea. I think that an organized presentation of what RTC is all about will help more clearly define the sport. That should help a variety of groups: newcomers to know more about what they are getting into; the media to present us in an accurate way; public authorities to know that RTC is a legitimate and safe activity. It should also help guide what we as climbers do, too.
When I talk to a ranger at some park (local, state, or Federal), it would be helpful to be able to refer to the document and say, "Here is a well-thought out explanation of what I'm doing."

I think we need to be careful, however, not to be too restrictive when our community makes the standards (or guidelines, or whatever we decide to call them). The standards need to be specific enough to be clear about what we do, but not overly defined so that they don't limit innovation or safe variations of how to do things.

Patrick

I think Patrick has it right. This might be designed in part as a "pocket presentation". Effective communication is important, an overly legalistic or lengthy document would not be useful when you're standing with a ranger in the woods.

These guys bring up a good point. One size fits all… Not.

Perhaps a standard is NOT what is actually needed here.
I will freely admit that a standard is not a friendly document.
Icabod did infer to this too. If we do create a standard, it will be the first thing the lawyers & insurance companies go to in the event of a rec-climbing “incident”, (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

The pro-climbers amongst us have compiled the required info many times over. It would seem the question is: What do we actually want to do with that data?
A cold hard standard?
A brochure of accepted rec-climbing conduct?
The data is all here… How do you want it packaged?

Let TCI and the other established "www.TCwhatever.com" advocates hand down the decision on exactly what it is we are to publish here. Is this to be a legal document, a public relations gem, or general rules of conduct?

Make the call. Post the decision. Move us forward.

FYI: In case anyone missed it, Ponderosa shows an outstanding document on TC-Colorado at:
http://www.treeclimbingco.com/standards.html

The Z [ANSI Z133] was not written by insurance agents. The commitee is made up of arborist industry professionals. All volunteers. There is no support money from ANSI for getting to the two annual face to face meetings. The meetings are open to anyone but membership needs to be voted on. From what I've seen, no one has ever been voted down for membership.

There are many good things in the Z that could become part of a RTC guideline. Double locking biners is one item that should be standard for any tree climbing.

In response to EJ's question, "Is this to be a legal document, a public relations gem, or general rules of conduct?":

Our intention at the start of this conversation was simply to come up with a set of GUIDELINES--suggested general rules of conduct for use of the forest by recreational climbers. Since Wild Bill's document (printed at the start of this discussion) would be updated here by the climbing community (at least those who participate on our message board) who are very knowledgeable about and deeply care about ethical use of the forest, I already assume that our final product will be a "gem" for public relations. I envision it appearing on every RTC website, and a summary of it used in a general brochure about tree climbing and/or as "talking points" for the general public, the media, and park authorities, rangers, etc. I certainly would publish it in TREE CLIMBING ONLINE, and we can ask Sherrill, New Tribe, and other retailers of climbing gear to publish it on their websites and in their catalogs.

We can also create a SEPARATE set of safety guidelines for recreational climbing technique and gear (such as double-locking biners, as Tom suggests). These will be "climbing standards" that have become established in practice because they've been proven to be safe by recreational climbers over a period of many years. I envision this set of guidelines being published alongside of the forest use guidelines.

I hope this helps clarify things.

Climb safe!
Patty