Sleeping platforms

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Take it easy Tom, I had never heard of companies making platforms for people to sleep on in trees. I thought that the tree sitters (huggers) made thier own. JP and I were just having a little fun, I started looking around on the net and found that link (thanks for showing me how to post them). Do you not find it interesting that a 25 year climber is now a tree hugger/protester obviously showing his talents to others? I always wondered how they got up those big trees and if it is ok to spur a tree if you are trying to save it, now I know. If I had it my way when people were illegaly camping out in trees, stopping fallers from work, this is what I would do. I would warn them to come on down, then I would put an undercut in the tree, then I would ask them to come down again, at this point I can't see anyone wanting to stay. If they stayed, I would, cause I am not a monster, stop halfway through the backcut and give them a final chance. Then I don't know exactly what I would do if they didn't come down, guess it would depend on how I felt, what they said, if anyone else was around....Just joking, I would throw my steelcore around the tree, walk up it and take them up some weed.......
 
I had never heard of sleeping platforms for trees either until I got my recreational tree climbing catalog from Sherrill. They have an awesome picture of a woman sitting on one of these platforms floating above a misty evergreen forest watching the sun come up (or go down, it's hard to tell) and I thought, I need to get one of those!

The pictures of the logging protesters that I remember seeing had plywood platforms (of all things!) and definitely appeared home made.

Somewhere I remember reading that rock climbers have been using sleeping platforms for years when doing big climbs. If you can hang the platform from a rock wall, why not to a tree limb? But I couldn't find any information about these things. Tom's use of the word "portaledge" was the search term I needed. Thanks Tom!
 
Check this out:

http://www.rockclimbing.com/articles/index.php?id=97

Another option is to use a cot or folding lawn chair. One weekend I went tree camping with Jeff Jepson in nice double leader white pine at his river place. He took a folding lawn chair and added four straps with adjusters to level it out. That worked just fine. IT was more bulky but that wasn't a big deal.

The next morning we were woken by an airplane buzzing us. The pastor of his church knew that we were tree camping and went for a flight to see us. That was a cool way to wake up.

I talked with a fella who rented big wall gear to climbers at Yosemite. He rented PLs too. I figured that they might still have life in them for tree climbing so I asked about buying his used ones. He said that they are pretty trashed. He was the one who planted the idea of using plywood for the deck. There's no reason that it wouldn't work. The bulk could be an issue if you had to hike very far to the tree. I've been thinking of a fold-out unit of some sort.
 
A thin piece of plywood with a hinge sounds good for a tree that's not too far off the beaten track. Check out this platform, looks like it's made with 3" x 3/4" or so wood in a lattice held togther with cord (on the right). You can roll it up to rig it into the tree:
Rolled platform

In this shot you can barely see it from below, guess it's a combo platform/hammock:
Looking up at platform

Good thing about the design is that it doesn't hold water when it rains.
 
If you read the thread at the same speed people talk...it stays on track with a bit of humor thrown in. Thanks Tom! Didn't mean to upset the thread.
 
I might be signing my own death warrant here, but I can't not chime in. I am a forest defender from humbolt co. CA. I climb trees up to 300 ft. tall. I set platforms as well as weave nets with cord in between branches. I also teach other people how to climb. Now before you all slam me real good, think about the rare opportunity you have to "sit down" with someone like me and talk. To be honest, I value the opinions of arborists and loggers just as much as those of the citizen living in the area we protest, and the "hippies" i protest with. If you guys want to be jerks, you won't see any more posts, but if you want to sincerely ask questions about what I do, why I do it, and how it's done, feel free. For starters, I do know how to spur climb (i really like it in fact), but we most certainly do not spur up the trees we are trying to save. There are lots of other ways to get into the canopy from the ground as I'm sure most of you are aware. Who has tryed skywalking (unassisted traverse)? I joined this site to share knowledge with other skilled climbers who love trees as much as i do, and i'm willing to listen to your guys' critiques and opinions, just keep it objective please.
 
before anyone skrews this up, consider that this is a very rare opportunity for real loggers to communicate with real protesters through the safety and anonymity of the internet rather than in the field. i think we can all learn something here so dont nobody F this up!

shag, here's a question i have . . in the last quarter century we have seen how curtailing logging operations in the US has cost the jobs of many loggers and millworkers. Forested regions in other parts of the world are now being logged in order to meet the demand for wood-products. At the same time, many of these foreign countries have poor working conditions/wages and little or no environmental protection laws. How do you respond to this?

also, i dont want to make any assumptions here, but my guess is that you feel some amount of timber harvesting is necessary. if so, how do you invision logging. if not, what do you purpose we do for wood-products?
 
Last edited:
Sizzle-Chest said:
before anyone skrews this up, consider that this is a very rare opportunity for real loggers to communicate with real protesters through the safety and anonymity of the internet rather than in the field. i think we can all learn something here so dont nobody F this up!
I saw this earlier but I went away before I said something, still can't think of something civil but I'm thinking.
 
Shag, what kind of sleeping platforms have you used and/or made? I take it from your first post that you have some experience sleeping in trees, so perhaps you can comment on what kind of sleeping platforms you have used, the advantages and disadvantages of certain approaches, etc.
 
I'll second the welcome to Shag. If anyone wants to get into a discussion about global logging economics, forest ecology or tree politics I'd be happy to join in, in a new thread!

I think of rec climbing as neutral space, the canopy is where we can set aside our speeches and enjoy being in the tree.
-moss
 
rmihalek said:
I saw the $500 tree tent in the Sherrill rec climbing catalogue. It looks really nice. When I searched the 'net for other companies selling sleeping platforms for trees or rock walls or whatever, I couldn't find any. What do the rock climbers call these things? Do any other companies make tree sleeping platforms? Has anyone built their own?

Reading this thread cracks me up how fast people can get off the subject!:dizzy:
 
Actually, Tom answered most of my questions in one of his earlier posts where he described the portaledge. I had to resist the temptation to divert the thread when Shag posted, but quickly realized that, regardless of his motives (which Moss rightly said can be discussed in a new thread) I felt that Shag could contribute quite a bit to the discussion of tree sleeping.

We may have to wait a while for him to descend from his latest aerial mission to post though!
 
rmihalek said:
We may have to wait a while for him to descend from his latest aerial mission to post though!

:)

I have doubts about my ability to sleep in a tree. This may have to do with my attempt to sleep in a treehouse in a multiple leader red maple. Every time the wind blew the trunks moved and the treehouse creaked like an old ship at sea. Pretty much impossible to sleep through. I climbed down in the middle of the night and slept on the ground.

My point being that noise is something to consider with any kind of more fixed platform compared to a hanging rig. If there is any kind of structural contact with the tree (besides rope or webbing) there is a potential for noise when the tree moves.
 
TreeCo said:
Welcome to the site Shag.

You are going to find some real jerks here so be prepared. Don't let the jerks chase you away or keep you from talking to those of us who would like to carry on a civil conversation with you.

As you know this is an emotionally heated subject. That heat is represented here on both sides.

Dan
And just where does this cull stand?
 
One guess is that he is against logging old growth. This is a position that I can understand, however, if the old growth trees are part of harvest that has gone through all the appropriate legal channels, then the trees should be cut. The loggers shouldn't be punished for this by showing up for the workday only to find a tresspasser sleeping in stand. If there are people who truly believe that old growth timber shouldn't be cut then they should raise some money, start a PAC (political action committee) and convince the politicians the good old fashioned way ($$).

With that being said, I'd like to know how anti-logging people justify their use of forest products. Is there such a thing as an anti-old growth logging person who truly believes in sustainable harvesting of second, third, fourth growth trees? Did that "Butterfly" chick who spent a couple weeks in some tree really use a plywood platform? Shag, comments?
 
I guess we're barely talking about sleeping in trees, so I'll run with the ball!

I'm for long-term planning to promote sustainable timber harvest and healthy ecosystems. Selective cutting is good, flattening large tracts of woods like a cornfield harvest is bad.

In the case of Coast Redwood, Sequoia sempervirens I'm against logging out the remaining unprotected old growth stands.

If there was a label on wood products that said "Not derived from clear-cut old growth" or "Not derived from almost extinct or rare rainforest hardwoods" or how about "Not ripped out of the ground as fast as possible to create huge profits to please the shareholders and make the board of directors richer than they already are" I'd be happy with that.

Ecoterrorist is a bogus spin term. Terrorists are people who kill or threaten to kill innocent people to create an atmosphere of fear for entire cities or countries. Vandalism does not a terrorist make. If that was the case we'd have to round up 50% of all teenagers and send them to Guantanamo.
-moss
 
moss said:
I guess we're barely talking about sleeping in trees, so I'll run with the ball!

I'm for long-term planning to promote sustainable timber harvest and healthy ecosystems. Selective cutting is good, flattening large tracts of woods like a cornfield harvest is bad.

In the case of Coast Redwood, Sequoia sempervirens I'm against logging out the remaining unprotected old growth stands.

If there was a label on wood products that said "Not derived from clear-cut old growth" or "Not derived from almost extinct or rare rainforest hardwoods" or how about "Not ripped out of the ground as fast as possible to create huge profits to please the shareholders and make the board of directors richer than they already are" I'd be happy with that.

Ecoterrorist is a bogus spin term. Terrorists are people who kill or threaten to kill innocent people to create an atmosphere of fear for entire cities or countries. Vandalism does not a terrorist make. If that was the case we'd have to round up 50% of all teenagers and send them to Guantanamo.
-moss
Moss, the eco-terrorists have done exactly that, created or attempted to create an atmosphere of fear for specific groups of people, loggers and millworkers. That was the whole point of spiking trees, to intimidate the fallers from falling, but it was sawmill workers who died when the huge blades at the mill fragmented into thousands of pieces, after hitting spikes. This is how metal detectors came into use at mills. Now they have moved to ceramic spikes, the message is the same, log and risk death.The deliberate destruction of logging machinery is not the work of partying teenagers, drunk on friday night, the comparison is faulty. Your idea of selective logging sounds great, but is far from practical, safety or otherwise on steep ground. THere is no need for enviromentalists to commit crimes to further thier cause here in BC, they have succesfully brainwashed the public over years of protests, thier message always the same BS. They pretty well get what they want, it is just sickening, we have single parks here that are bigger in size than many counties in the US. Well over 12% of provincial lands are parks. Between unfair timber allocation, softwood tariffs, and constant protesting, small logging communities are being hurt, so no, I have little sympathy for these people.
 
first off, i see no problem changing the direction of this thread if thats the way it goes. thats what discissions are all about

moss, i agree with you on some points. i dont see any reason to be harvesting old-growth logs. however, i think that the over-crowded second and third growth stands need to be managed through selective logging and smart forestry so that they can eventually achieve a more natural state while still supplying the small need for wood-products.

something to consider is that in oregon (where the majority of US timber is still extracted) old growth logs are worth less to a modern mill than small, second growth logs. all the machinery has been converted to accomodate smaller logs and mills simply arent equiped to handle old-growth the way they used to.

also, ecoterrorism is not such a bogus term. blowing up/burning logging equipment, mills, ranger stations or spiking logs and putting loggers in any kind of danger to deter them from work is certainly a form of terrorism. terrorism has new connotaions because of 9/11, but in ecoterrorism is terrorism in the traditional sense of the word. at the same time, calling a tree-sitting and other forest protection ecoterrorism is a misleading. most often, these are non-violent attempts to halt loggging. im sure that many tree-sitters work to disassociate themselves from forms of eco-terrorism based on the negative connotations.
 
Spiking and that sort of thing is as about as ignorant and irresponsible as it gets. I thought spiking was over a long time ago as an anti-logging activity. I also thought mills have to scan logs no matter what considering there's a high probability that random metal junk will be in a percentage of logs.

If teenagers as terrorists doesn't work for you try this as an analogy. A bank robber makes a group of people lie on the floor at gunpoint, might even kill some of them. The victims are terrorized. I've never heard anyone call an armed bank robber a terrorist. The term ecoterrorist is classic spin. I'm sure some speechwriter/public relations hack is still patting themselves on the back for that one.

Over protect or under protect forests? It's a constant process to get it right. If you don't like the existing policy get involved to make the change.

Now why is it that we have to clearcut steep slopes for logging safety? Could it be that there is nothing left to log on less steep terrain? The typical places where you can find sizable wild trees in the east are in steep and rough terrain where it was too difficult to log with traditional techniques. Unfortunately that limitation has been overcome with current technology.
-moss
 

Latest posts

Back
Top