What is more dangerous, rock climbing or tree climbing?

[mikeg520]

Just wondering, which one has more fatalities?

 

[MasterBlaster]

Interesting question. I'm curious as to the per 100 fatalities. My guess is treeclimbing.

 

[teressa green]

mine too ,aint seen many rock climbers with ,chainsaws,silkys,they climb with nothing more dangerous than a swiss army knife in their pockets,ive seen cliff hanger ,

 

[pbtree]

I agree, besides, there are probably more loco tree climbers than rock climbers on any give day!

 

[M.D. Vaden]

Do you think the rock climbers have one of those injury charts showing red dots on parts of the body to show where the most injuries occur?

I'll bet it's a toss up.

If I have to guess, I'll say rock climbing, but mainly for two reasons:

1. Foolishness, like the guys in Oregon near Mulnomah Falls that climbed too late at night.

2. The free climbers that don't use gear.

The part that may throw off comparison is that rock climbing can be more recreational and not so much professional, whereas tree climbing is primarily professional.

 

[TimberMcPherson]

If your measuring free or solo climbers they would be pretty high but having worked in both industries I think tree climbers would win the scars competition hands down. Recreational climbing branched from moutaineering which is far more dangerous.

 

[xander9727]

I'm not sure about fatalities but I've seen WAY more stranded rock climbers in need of rescue than I've seen tree climbers. Addtionally more tree climbers are employed.......but then I guess that's why they are tree climbers.

 

[rb_in_va]

The part that may throw off comparison is that rock climbing can be more recreational and not so much professional, whereas tree climbing is primarily professional.

Recreational tree climbing is gaining in popularity though. I would bet there are many rec climbers right here at AS.

 

[NickfromWI]

I'm gonna have to guess rock-climbing is more dangerous.

how to we find out the answers?

love
nick

 

[MasterBlaster]

OSHA stastistics don't really help much here, I guess.

 

[OutOnaLimb]

We have had at least half a dozen rock climbers get killed in the Garden of the Gods here in Colorado Springs this year. As with tree climbing fatalities most of the deaths are do to ignorance and improper training. Im gonna go out on a limb here and say that thier are way more rock climbers get killed than tree climbers. My groundie is a big time rock climber, I will have to ask his opinion tomorrow. When your climbing trees the most you are usually gonna fall is 65 ft. But if your on a multi pitch rock 250ft up and you fall and your protection blows out. Its hasta lasagna, dont get any on ya.

Kenn

 

[jamie]

rock

im saying rock climbing, look at the anchors, most of the time tree anchors are prety ???? stable, incidents are down to improper conduct,

rock climbing when you fall there is the chance that the anchor may not hold.

rock climbing tends to be above anchor with less controlled falls where ax tree work is (should) be on a static line

jamie

 

[TREEWRK]

rock climbing or tree climbing

tree climbing is really more dangeruos rocks are stable and don;t have have
included bark or dead leaders :blob5:

 

[OutOnaLimb]

tree climbing is really more dangeruos rocks are stable and don;t have have
included bark or dead leaders :blob5:

Have you ever heard of rotten rock? Sand stone that is frozen and thawed over and over again. Im not talking about bolted sport routes that are screwed into shale or granite. Rock can be crumbly and if your setting protection via a camalot or a hex on a lead climb then chances are its gonna blow out. Where as if your in a tree and your smart your around the leader or at least on a solid crotch. I disagree more rock climbers get killed every year than arborists.

Kenn

 

[Newfie]

I would think they are both equally dangerous but that is from my perspective and limited to a little bit of rock climbing and repelling in the Army.
I would think that rock climbing has more fatalities simply because the tree climbing community is going to be made up predominantly of professionals w/ experience and training while the rock climbing community is more likely to have a much larger percentage of inexperienced, more money than common sense limp dicked yuppies.

But that is just my opinion,not fact, and i don't have any sources to reference.

 

[TimberMcPherson]

I think rock climbers would have more fatalities due to the fact that they are often hours from any sort of help (if anyone can reach them at all), they normally deck on very solid ground, most dont wear helmets, and even when all there safety gear works to 100% of its application its still very possible to get killed if you wing.
Lead climbing is a great way to get nailed, I was knocked out belaying while climbing (I was a rock,kayak and mountain instructor with the NZ army for a time) when the guy I was belaying on a multipitch climbing peeled and hit me. After that he hit me another 2 times before we managed to get up and out.
If you guys saw what kind of natural protection (like micro wires) that climbers put falls force on, youd stick to trees (I know I do)

 

[teressa green]

personally i dont climb unless theres some cash at the end of it ,

 

[MasterBlaster]

Ditto that!

 

[P_woozel]

Depending on how you define "rock climber", a couple scrambling in the boulders in J-tree after smoking a joint one falls gets a head injury because they dont have a helmet on, (why would they?) gets labled as a climbing accident. A group of Serria club baffoons hiking around the general vicinity of Mt.Baker gets called climbers when they become lost in the wet weather. So based on that I woulkd say "rock climbers" have us beat. I've yet to figure out the strange fascination with the fatality rate anyway, hardly a badge of honor :blob5:

 

[rb_in_va]

If you had to trim these trees I think it would be very dangerous.