Thanks for the clarification Tom. I am somewhat pessimistic about standards, due to the fact that I work in the building trades (residential design). I am constantly seeing poorly thought out changes in building codes costing people money, and causing confusion. I've never seen though a building code COST someone thier LIFE, so perhaps the time is right for us to clearly tell people what we expect to be standard practice, after all it won't kill anyone, and not doing so may contributer to getting a poorly informed soul killed.

That said I'm excited that we could possibly produce a document that will provide minimum accepted standards, and prohibit certain activities. I would say too that I'd like to see this all presented in a manner that does not limit new technology, or advacement, which I'd also love to be a part of evaluating.

I'll be glad to take part, if you guys would have me. I'll be glad also to post a copy of the final document at my site, for those who would visit.

Climb Safe!
Icabod

stadards are great, but unfortunately your standards (ANSI) are for the USA only....Canada does not recognize ANSI in any way shape or form......

food for thought.

...such as that of the Canadian people do not, however, allow the workplace to be run without rules and oversight to prevent employeers that operate within their borders to neglect the safety of the citizens that form the workforce.

Since you are a Canadian, perhaps you should share your knowledge of similar documents (perhaps those authored by the CCOHS), instead of suggesting that we should dump any consideration of ANSI documents because you, and/or your government do not recognize them.

The idea of this thread, despite how it may have been read by some, was to provide information that might add to the safety awareness of the participants of our sport, not to spur uproar, cause division, or to create a Constitution by which this activity could be policed.

In my opinion, it is a shame that this topic went greatly by the wayside. I still believe that this and other boards contain all the information needed to build such a guideline, because most of us love the activity, and the other participants, enough to give the answers that might prevent disaster. I grew tired of the topic, because SO MANY decided to add only pessimism. I realise that we are independent souls, and that has driven the furor. That said, I also understand that some of the paranoia might have not been totaly warrantless. I have recognized, though, that no one can control anothers actions, but we can control our own. Many have mentioned the SCUBA "governmemts". That is the way of our world though, and we do have to power to control out destiny. We can either provide a clear set of MINIMUM safety standards, or we can allow participants in dangerous activities to be labeled "Recreational Treeclimbers" and let one of them drag us into the muck by getting himself killed. I say if you don't meet the minimum standards (which haven't even yet been clearly defined) then you are not really a part of the activity, but some other activity. Perhaps the Accepted Practices name should be considered a definition of what we are.

I also highly suggest that we limit the negative, unproductive comments in the "Tree Climbing Standards" threads, so that we can continue to move in a positive direction, instead of descending into negativity. The motives and desires of those involved have been questioned long enough.

Climb Safe!
Icabod