Spring 2024 brought the potential for a wind of change to blow into the UK in the form of a series of workshops on fresh-thinking approaches to dual-system design, work positioning and climbing. The wind blew in from Japan in the form of the Wooden Hand, in collaboration with Treeworker UK.
The Wooden Hand is fronted by two-decade industry veteran Paul Poynter. For the past 12 years Paul has lived and worked in Japan, providing arborist climbing services and developing a host of training programmes and workshops; he is at the core of practical arb in Japan. The UK workshops were organised and supported by Robert ‘Noddy’ Knott – equipment supplier and ‘ancient’ of practical arboriculture. Noddy has near to four decades as an arborist and mentor to a host of climbers. His movement-based approach to safety and style in the work place has laid the building blocks for much of Paul’s workshop presentation. Noddy and Paul tell the story of how the workshops were developed and share some of their ideas.
If we explain the motivation for dedicated ‘two-rope’ use in professional tree work to a total beginner, it begins with the obvious discussion of anchoring safety.
While it is feasible to choose and safely work on one anchor, if the same principles are applied, doubling the anchor allows an overall increase in safety. Easily understood.
Now, if the same principle is laid out to a climber with some experience, the proposal must be tweaked. Expecting them to increase equipment and techniques in what can at times be a stressful environment does not necessarily increase safety or security. And, in fact, for those with only some experience and technical proficiency, one imagines that it could quickly diminish it.
Back to the beginner. The difficulty and importance of conveying key information leads us to believe that a reduction in technique allows a faster understanding of information.
Moving towards the goal of good work positioning, we can backwards-engineer a system. Understanding goals is key to development. Find out where you want to go, then learn to navigate yourself there.
Words are powerful
Language is a powerful tool whose influence shouldn’t be overlooked. It’s our feeling that development of dual-rope systems for tree work stepped off on the wrong foot in the UK. Choosing to describe dual-rope systems in the pre-existing terminology of industrial rope access created a limiting mindset. The terms ‘back-up’ and ‘redundancy’ convey the idea of an active single-rope system supported by a passive safety system with the two running side by side or in tandem yet generally managed at the same area within the system. Conversely, many arborists imagined that a ‘dual-rope’ system would simply involve getting two of everything and duplicating the whole system.
If we ask whether anything has moved forward as a result of this requirement, we can see that in many cases, the active system is unchanged from what went before – and it may be fair to say that the complexity of the adopted system can decrease safety because of the number of components involved.
What is clear, though, is that the majority of tree workers have not engaged with the current UK industry guidance: figures of up to 90% have been mentioned. Let’s hold that thought for a moment: if 90% of the industry is not compliant, what might that say about the situation we find ourselves in? We don’t intend to answer that question because to answer it would be to give an opinion and it’s the opinion of a few that brought us to where we currently stand.
Should we now step back, look at accident and incident statistics realistically and rationally, set out a longer-term engagement plan to meaningfully move forward, and stop shooting from the hip or being led by the nose? Few understand the safety issues related to climbing and cutting better than those who are engaged in it on a daily basis.
So, roll in something a little different.
Step 1: Body knowledge as a foundation for safety
Remember when you started to climb? A short series of techniques, five minutes to get them under your belt and a kick up the butt to get on with it. From that point on, how did you learn? Where did the tools come from to aid your development? Were there any?
We fundamentally do not have continuing professional development for practical arborists in the UK: we learn on the job as we go along and that is predominantly in the hands of our co-workers, up to 90% of whom, as already mentioned, are probably non-compliant.
Body knowledge as a foundation for tree work safety begins with understanding and accepting that everything we do in the practical domain is governed by our ability to feel our bodies and to recognise that the constant sensory feedback loop is what guides us to increasing awareness of what we ask them to do and how they respond.
For a new arborist, climbing typically begins in a way that’s fatiguing, and often continues to be so. Beyond the ergonomic approach to rope walking (that is, climbing the rope with foot and knee ascenders), it seems little is taught about micro-movement and almost zero about gripping patterns of the hand or footwork. To be blunt, a climber is asked to be physical but is given no guidance on how to do so. It puts them on a treadmill towards injury and failure.
We guided our workshop attendees through a series of exercises based on relaxing and stacking their bodies whilst bringing their attention to each area in turn. These are powerful exercises that culminate in sensing the integration of all body parts, controlled from the centre: they encourage being present, body integrity, calmness and increased awareness of the internal body map.
Our body responds primarily to the direction given to it by our brain, and over time we develop a muscle memory that feels as if we no longer have to think about the actions. The messages are still being sent by the brain but they are received on an altogether deeper level – within our bodymind. At this stage, rarely do we look back to our early days or to the future, and so we become stuck with our ability as it is. New techniques brought into the mix periodically or new equipment in the toolbox don’t fundamentally change our skill level; rather, they bring exactly what they are and no more: tools and tricks of the technical realm.
The more time and practice we give to being attentive to ALL of what is happening during any given task, the greater our ability to directly influence or change the outcome. This can result in increased personal safety, improved physical ability and greater awareness of the body we inhabit, alongside a myriad of possibilities that we can choose to invite into our lives.
Step 2: Design, practice and implementing change
For us to actively move forward in practical arboriculture, we must acknowledge and reflect on what brought us here, and that means our shared history as well as our personal musings and considerations. Diligent self-questioning brings awareness.
We thank our mentors for the guidance they bestow on us, and with our lived experience we consolidate whatever doesn’t fall through the cracks of memory. What we are left with as arborists is ‘how we do things’ and ‘how we question’. Rarely, it seems, do we look at the former from the perspective of the latter and that means were are unable to actively move forward.
However, occasionally someone or something rises to the surface that has the possibility to action change within us directly. That’s what the workshops were intended to do.
Some of the ideas explored in the workshops
Gravity is our ally
Paul says: Moving sections of trees with multiple ropes. Manipulating heavy loads with calculated ease. After so many years of study and application I am confident to be able to control and then move trees through the air to wherever is needed. Climbers have a third-party power source at their disposal, one that some see as a barrier to success: gravity is our ally. This sounds corny, but as water flows downhill, so must we.
Fight or flow?
Paul says: To fight or to flow, these are two important conceptual distinctions. Fear leads one toward a fighting stance, muscles engaged, adrenaline, fatigue. Flow, conversely, encourages relaxed posture, freedom of movement, a soft mind and agility.
As a rigger works within physical laws, so too does a climber. Our skeleton should be ‘stacked’, force compressing bones. A good posture for picking up boxes translates directly to tree climbing: keep your back straight. The younger and more athletically capable can push the boundaries of skeletal stacking, but we prefer to move slowly and in a considered way, whether that is finding a position as we ascend, or preparing to re-enter the tree from work on the outer canopy. Unhooking and starting a chainsaw. Sipping a cup of coffee. All with straight back, stacked, attuned to gravity’s flow. Slow, considered and well aligned = fewer injuries and less fatigue.
Climbing using space
Paul says: A rope under tension wants the climber to form circular motions. In suspension, moving along the circle’s edge, we are made to feel lighter, but plan your routes through complex branch structures. Study and delve. There is an abundance of techniques at our disposal. Like a rigging system, the climbing system and movement of the load (body) should be safe, smooth, reducing action and frustration whenever possible. A second rope here, a redirect point there. The occasional high-line and traverse technique.
Rigging systems are created, set and used to encompass as much of the work as possible. Redesigning and resetting are a pain. In climbing, too, create a system that encompasses as much of the work as possible: Stop chasing positions. Two anchors span the work and allow the climber effortless access to micro positions. A lanyard is deployed less and is no longer the crux of safety when cutting.
Major vs minor
Paul says: Safety is the foundation from which skill and technique grow. A minor technique may be used just once in a lifetime – important yet minor: part of the so called ‘bag-of-tricks’. Major techniques are constants; they are relied upon and trusted. They are dogged and resilient and should function in any circumstance. Learning how to throw rope is a major technique. Differences between friction hitches are minor techniques. Keeping it safe and simple (K.I.S.S.), organising techniques and equipment to function efficiently, is tricky and takes time to develop, but major techniques tend to have fewer steps and moving parts. They are unforgettable, like riding a bike. Choose major techniques – throwing rope, knot craft, physical mechanics knowledge, anchor techniques, MRS and SRS, pendulum movement, body thrusting – over minor.
Redirects
Paul says: I seem to carry less gear these days, and use fewer techniques, hoping to hit more major points than minor (see above) but this is subjective and organic.
SRS redirection, using natural points, means pulling up the standing end, which can be annoying. It’s balanced out by three good things: not having to carry slings, learning which points in the tree will be strong and an easy retrieve of the system. It’s so powerful to be in suspension and to quickly come off from one line while still being suspended on another. It redefines several complex aspects of tree climbing. It is a MAJOR technique. Using two systems makes redirects simple, both setting and returning.
To set a redirect up close to the suspension point, simply pass the rope and device over the said point. Descending away as the standing part runs over it is called a ‘Pony Tail’ redirect. It’s fast to set and retrievable too.
Thinking about anchors
Trees are a vast collection of cells creating seemingly abstract forms. Rules of natural design can be teased out of the haze, as demonstrated by the works of Halle, Mattheck, Rinn or artworks by Bierstadt, Cyan or Constable. As climbers we understand those rules by observing the characteristic attributes of trees that allow us to move freely within their physical structure (or stop us from doing so), or whilst rigging our systems into the unions formed by bifurcations. We build a dialogue with the properties of the wood which allows us to make ‘touchy-feely’ decisions that advise the design of our ropework systems. Those who endure the challenges of flirting with physics find that all is not as it may seem: when we start fretting over forces and vectors, we begin to recognise the tree not only as its physical presence but also its interaction with the space it occupies and beyond.
With throwlines and cambium/friction savers, we can set our anchor systems remotely, i.e. at great distance from us, which means that understanding structural integrity is vital, and we must choose ‘unquestionably reliable’ anchor points. The higher our anchor, the easier it is to reach the canopy extremities. Without compromising the tree or rope system, we set our anchor at a point suited to the task at hand; however, this can often be in the red to amber zone where risk of anchor failure increases. If we select a lower and stronger anchor, we gain degrees of structural safety but decrease safe access to the extremities due to increased loading, through bodyweight, because of poor work positioning. Stationary rope systems (SRS) allow us to move along the path of the rope which can be positioned with multiple contact points (redirects) in branches and unions; this allows improved rope angles at the extremities but may result in less than optimum strength at the redirects.
The American Clacker™ (AC), an anchoring device designed by Paul, allows two SRS to be anchored at the same location in a conjoined fashion. The primary system is attached directly to the climber whilst the second, positioning, system is moved around the canopy using redirects to facilitate a dual-rope system that holds the climber permanently between two anchor points and in suspension. This creates the potential for the climber to move through the space in the tree structure and does not limit them to only moving along the structure. Not only does this allow for great accuracy when work positioning but it also manages the risk of pendulum swing.
A question may arise here regarding the hierarchy of anchor point selection as discussed in the Association’s Technical Guide 1, derived directly from the Work at Height Regulations, which encourages us to select two ‘independent’, ‘unquestionably reliable’ anchors for our systems. Yet the AC requires only a single anchor which can be placed lower down in the canopy where all anchors at the stem can be deemed to be ‘unquestionably reliable’. If we were to use this anchoring method, we would be omitting the first stage of the hierarchical process; is this acceptable if our primary anchor point is always ‘unquestionably reliable’? Rather than climbing the structure, we are now able to climb through the space the structure occupies.
The dual-rope systems are locked in at the anchor by a knot-blocking technique using alpine butterfly knots but are independent of one another. The ideal set-up would incorporate climbing devices that are able to be placed mid-line. It is possible to use any configuration but a little more faffing might be needed with the on–off process required to set redirects in the positioning line. Once set, we have two active rope systems that can easily be moved around and reset in a multitude of ways and positions within the canopy.
Workshop participants were given a tree, a scenario and free rein to draw whatever solution came to mind. This is Mark Bridge’s solution.
Designing a system
It really pays to brush up on your physics and understanding of timber strength properties to build a positive working relationship with tools, knots and techniques, but the benefits outweigh the study required. And you’ll manage to work effectively, efficiently and in compliance with industry guidance.
To understand the tools, techniques and physics of climbing and rigging systems we must be cognisant of two factors: the mass of the load to be moved and the strength characteristics of the system’s components. For practicality, it’s not possible to carry computer-based analysis equipment to a worksite and so we tend to engage our touchy-feely spider sense in making decisions on the fly as to where, what and how we select and place equipment within any given scenario.
Workshop participants, with pen and paper in hand, were given a tree, a scenario and free rein to create and draw whatever solution came to mind. Mass and resultant forces were calculated, and so the process revealed itself during the two-hour window set for the task. Making a drawing in two dimensions while thinking in three is a formidable undertaking, particularly if your pencil skills require some improvement. The exercise resulted in a wide range of approaches to the same conundrum, from very simplistic rigging and tag line solutions through to multi-tree, multi-anchor set-ups engaging compound rigging systems and power winching tools.
The daily lot of the climbing arborist and rigger had a very bright light shone upon it; the discussions that continued way into lunch were evidence of the impact of the exercise. It’s rare that we spend this amount of time considering the systems we create, discussing the solutions with colleagues and musing over their efficacy and necessity.
If we create clarity within our workforce regarding the tasks and technicality required to undertake rigging operations, we share the workload and increase the knowledge and capability of all involved, as well as creating an inclusive space in which to work.
Workshops
This article and the workshops that preceded it are the result of countless hours of discussion between us spanning a decade of working and spending time together. We could never have known what directions the friendship would range in, but our shared passion to seek and explore the body’s ability to efficiently function in rope and harness working was a driving force, as well as boiling down the very essence of all that is at play in this domain.
The 2024 workshops were hosted by the arborist teams at the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (Tom Broecke), Oxford University’s Harcourt Arboretum (Ben Jones) and Joe Stockton of the Good Tree Company, Ekero, Sweden. A huge debt of gratitude and appreciation goes out to the hosts who were keen to engage with the concept of a progressive presentation that really is new to the practical arb. We also offer our sincere thanks to the attendees, who had little idea what they were getting themselves into yet engaged so deeply that several groups are forming to help grow and support the material presented. We wish them the best going forward and they have our complete support.
Please make contact if you’re interested to learn more and would like to attend workshops in person during 2025 – info@treeworker.co.uk, woodenhandarboriculture@gmail.com.
Our thanks go to Black Water Media, The Wooden Hand, Blaze Cyan and Mark Bridge for permission to use the images in this article.
Footnote:
On 7th January 2020 a petition was created on the Change.org platform entitled ‘Single rope climbing for UK arborists’ in response to the UK Health and Safety Executive’s interpretation of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. It appeared that the fast-track approach they endorsed would leave the arboricultural industry having to implement wholescale change without being allowed a fair amount of time to solve the conundrum or form a considered plan into the future. The petition asked that time be given to address the research required. 7,361 individuals throughout the world signed: they were totally ignored. A very basic training model was formulated and nearly five years later, where do we find ourselves? Have we stepped forwards or backwards, or are we maybe just treading water? Has the implemented guidance increased safety within the industry and is it time for a serious investigation to search for honest answers to honest questions?
This article was taken from Issue 207 Winter 2024 of the ARB Magazine, which is available to view free to members by simply logging in to the website and viewing your profile area.