Jim, thank you for this. When I was still working long before
retirement I took a safety course which stressed that safety and
production were equal. If safety was first then there would be little
production and if production was first there would be little safety.
There has to be a balance. Personally if I don't feel comfortable while
on the tower I make changes. I have done a little rock climbing and I
much prefer free climbing a tower. Everyone has to decide for
themselves what is required for them to be comfortable.
Doug
"Think of all the ways you can hurt yourself laughing."
-----Original Message-----
Subject: [TowerTalk] free climbing, etc.
To a certain extent, a lot of this discussion echoes that in the rock
climbing area.. (where there is essentially no employment or
occupational exposure issues)
free vs aid climbing? top-rope and/or bolts vs not?
is it appropriate to free-solo? What about free-solo'ing an aid climb?
At some point all of these have "make a mistake and die" sorts of
things, as well as "bad luck and die", just because you were in the
wrong place at the wrong time (e.g. rockfall, lightning, crazed raptor
attack).
There's been a huge amount of discussion in the climbing community over
the years about whether "physical alteration of the rock is appropriate
if it improves safety" (e.g. bolt or not bolt) especially vis a vis
national parks and wilderness areas (where modifications are
theoretically illegal under the Organic Act).
And there's all the discussion about "but there are incidental costs
from bad decisions that society incurs, so therefore, society gets to
weigh in on the decision" (e.g. rescue costs for climbers who get
stuck).. do we have some sort of rating system to only allow qualified
climbers? Do we charge people without a "climbing license" a fee for
insurance against the higher odds that they'll require rescue or body
recovery?
The same thing applies to many other activities (surfing? backpacking?
jumping horses over fences?)
Ultimately, we all get to make our own choices, based on our own
personal evaluation of the relative risks and consequences. We can hope
to influence others by education, example, etc.. but beyond that, so
far, it's not particularly regulated.
Occupational exposure can serve as an example, but it *is* fundamentally
different in many ways from recreational exposure. *No* employee has
total free-choice, while you DO have free choice in recreation. Yes,
many employers have "if you don't think it's safe, then don't do it"
policies, but let's be real.. exercise the "i don't think it's safe"
option too many times, and you aren't a very productive employee, and
the employer will say "we found someone else"
(bringing up an interesting question about climbing rangers doing rescue
work.. they DO get to do things that the recreational climber is not
allowed to do.. use helicopters in wilderness areas, for instance. I
suspect they're also allowed to "make permanent modifications" if
needed.. e.g. they can put in bolts with power tools if needed... and
what does OSHA have to say about all of that, to boot...)
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|