What it is, is in the name – they are bags for rope.  But what it does, is sooooo much more. The rope bag is, arguably, the hardest working piece of gear there is. It protects our rope, our most foundational yet vulnerable piece of equipment, and in doing so it protects our very lives. From the moment it’s put into service it is doing what it does during, in between, and especially on the way to every project of it’s lifespan.

Think about it: You suddenly find yourself on your way perform a last minute, urgent, one day, visual inspection job on a roller coaster at an amusement park on the other side of the country. With no time to ship gear in advance, you’ll have to fly with all your equipment – including your rope (good thing the client is picking up the extra baggage fees).

Are you going to place those coils of naked rope on the scale at check in counter? Or endure the strange looks and stupid jokes from fellow passengers because your carry-on is a coil of 100m rope?

In this moment, you begin to understand just how wise a choice you made in popping for the expense of a rope bag.

Aside from keeping our precious safe from the hands of under-paid baggage handlers, over-zealous TSA agents, and the unknown horrors found in the belly of airport baggage systems, rope bags protect our ropes from the harsh environments to which we so cruelly subject them while in storage, and on a project.

Especially on large projects, days (if not weeks) can be spent simply rigging ropes and gear to make access to the actual work location. A single project can involve hundreds of individual ropes of varying lengths and specifications, adding up to several miles of total rope necessary to perform whatever work awaits.  With a burst of static the radio blares out a request from the lead technician for a specific rope. With so many pieces of rope in the cache, thank heavens for the clearly discernable labels on the outsides of the bags! Even the rookie ground guy is able to find the right one!

As the valuable load is hauled into place, secure in it’s protective bag, you can put to bed any fears of  the load (ropes) from getting snagged on all those unseen sharp edges and pinch points along the way.

Working double time

Rope bags are equally as vital when the contained ropes are in service, from outset to demobilization.

Rigging is a demanding task.  The 100% focus required when a tech is moving across a span, setting lines, and rigging systems is quite enough to be thinking of.  The last thing one would want to deal with is a tangled, knotted rope while standing on a beam barely the width of their boot while perched hundreds of feet above the ground.

Even for a technician on-rope the bag can be vital to safety. Work at height can be windy – which, in itself, is not a great hazard. However, when work is not managed effectively with respect to the wind, the hazard can be enormous.  Ask anyone who has ever been thrust as a fleshy wrecking ball into a steel wind turbine tower; these are some of the most terrifying moments in a lifetime. In circumstances such as these, often the only option is to go straight down, and at an expedited pace. When multiple ropes are left free hanging, nature can tie knots you’ve never heard of.

Another serious safety hazard that can be created by loose hanging ropes comes from falling debris. A couple of common industries particularly susceptible to such would be rock scaling and smokestack work. It is probably safe to assume that a 600lb rock or chunk of caustic chemical found caked to walls of a stack would have a very adverse effect should it snag on the tail of a rope coming out of a workers descender as it falls down below.

When it comes to rescue, rope bags are also vital. Not just in the ease of getting the ropes up to where they are needed, but also for the ability of the rescuer to be able to negotiate an appropriate route back down with the patient. In many environments, such as the telecom world, straight down isn’t an option due to equipment and obstructions mounted to the towers.

What to look for in a rope bag

What comprises the best all-around rope bag is in the eye of the beholder (unless it’s one that a percentage of each sale goes directly into my personal bank account). A good rule of them when purchasing a rope bag is to make sure that its features meet the specific needs of what, where, and how the rope is going to be used. Some of us may have started out using typical backpacks bought from thrift stores as rope bags. Sure they worked, just not very well. Over the many years and many industries, time and experience provide personal insight into what to look for in a rope bag. 

First and foremost, is it tough enough for the environment? Most nylon bags can handle some abuse. However, baggage handlers will administer that amount. A bag constructed of heavy packcloth, PVC or ballistic cloth will hold up much better than light weight nylon – much stronger and tear resistant. Durability, of course, must be balanced against weight and co-efficient of friction. In my initial work on wind turbines my thought was simple nylon for sliding bags over the side of a smooth fiberglass nacelle. However, I quickly learned that bolt heads and threads are very sharp, and that even ‘smooth fiberglass’ can chafe material. Being ‘waterproof’ doesn’t hurt either.  PMI rope bags are constructed of rugged, heavy-duty coated canvas that holds up to even the harshest of abrasion, and is sturdy enough to hold some shape even when empty. Some PMI bags offer a double-layer bottom for even greater protection.

Next, look at the external handles/straps. Size, stitching and arrangement are all important factors. Stitching is especially critical if you’re planning on hoisting your rope bag – face it, 200 meters of rope is a bit too much weight to climb with. A substantial attachment point to hang that heavy load from while on rope will prevent misery in the field. Things like shoulder straps are crucial if the bag will need to be carried for any appreciable distance or across uneven terrain. Not just any shoulder-straps, either. Make sure they’re ergonomic, adjustable, and comfortable to wear. Plain two-inch webbing will feel an awful lot like a commando-wire cable saw cutting into your shoulders after the first fifty-feet.  All PMI rope bags have firmly mounted handles at the top, and those handles aren’t just a strip of webbing. No, they’re rounded out to a diameter that spreads the load more comfortably across your hand rather than digging into your fingers. PMI rope bags with shoulder straps are actually called ‘rope packs’ and these feature a curved, lightly padded, adjustable carrying system that optimizes comfort and weight, similar to backpack straps.

Another critical feature to consider is how you will get the rope into – and out of – the bag.  Stuffing a floppy rope bag is like trying to push a rope up a staircase. A top-load bag with substantial enough bag material to hold at least a bit of shape as you hold it at the top with one hand, and stuff with the other, is ideal.  Deploying rope from a top-load bag is also an optimum situation; PMI’s draw string closure provides just enough umph to keep the rope in place without adding a lot of complexity.  While  recreational climbers tend to lean towards bags that unfold into a tarp, these can be more trouble than they’re worth in an industrial environment.

Something people don’t always think about is what to do with the “tail end” of the rope – the end that stuffs down into the bag first. An advantage of rope bags is that they can keep rope from tangling – but if the end of the rope that goes into the bag first isn’t secured, whatever natural wiggling and shifting that occurs in storage and carrying can cause that end to snake around, twisting, tangling, and creating all sorts of knots. Some rope bags have a grommet in the bottom through which the rope is passed and knotted before stuffing the bag; the downside of this is that there’s now a knot under your bag, preventing it from standing up straight. PMI bags address this issue by putting the grommet in front, just under the clear labeling pocket – creating something of a “belly-button” effect (it’s an outie.)

Oh, right… the clear labeling pocket! PMI’s clear pocket is made of a durable clear plastic, large enough for a very big label, product instructions, or even a full-size rope-inspection card. There’s also a hook-and-loop closure to keep all that stuff from falling out, with a little pull tab to make it easy to open when needed.

Finally, consider gear loops and pockets. Some folks like them, some folks don’t… but if you’re going to opt for pockets, at least make sure they’re big enough to hold a reasonable amount of gear. If you opt for pockets, you’ll probably also want shoulder straps (consider the weight!)  In this case, be sure the pockets are in a balanced position to keep the weight centered while you are carrying the bag on your back. PMI rope-packs feature bellowed pockets that tuck down when not in use, but expand when space is needed. They also feature side release buckle closures, and those super-snazzy pack-straps for carrying on your shoulders.

”Beginning”

To begin with, OSHA regulation does not address harnesses other than those used for Industrial Fall Protection and Construction Fall Protection (including those used in confined spaces.) The regulatory language in these standards describe harnesses as being part of a fall arrest system that permits up to 6’ fall on a dorsal attachment – something that is generally not acceptable in rigging for vertical rescue operations, due to the increased hazards that would be imposed on rescuers.

“Harnesses for work at height and harnesses for rescue are two very different things”

Sometimes those who are trying to make decisions without the full scope of information can misunderstand this… Harnesses for work at height and harnesses for rescue are two very different things… just as shoes for industrial safety and shoes for mountaineering are two very different things.

Outside of Confined Space operations, OSHA does not actually address rescue, other than to say that a worker who has fallen into fall protection must be rescued promptly. Even in the realm of confined space, which is the only place they really talk about rescue in any detail, OSHA does not address rescue equipment (see interpretation letter which states there are no specifications for rescue equipment.)

OSHA may someday address rulemaking for emergency services responders, but as of now, the few references smattered throughout regulation are inconsistent and out of date (see link). As rescuers we should defer to their own acknowledgment of this and look elsewhere for guidance.

“Best Practice can be a bit subjective”

At present, we are best served to consider Industry Standards (ASTM, NFPA) and Industry Best Practice (what you see happening in real life) as a guide for how to best equip emergency services responders for rope rescue. Industry Best Practice can be a bit subjective and specific to application, environment, or even local custom, so here we will focus on decision-making processes and related standards.

To establish some background for this post, I (the author) have been a member of an active mountain rescue team in the front range of Colorado since 1985. I have also served with two fire departments over the course of my career (plus the Yellow Jackets wildland crew, which doesn’t really apply here…) and have been involved in research, testing, and standards development related to rescue since 1987. I presently serve with NFPA 1983, ASTM F32, and ANSI Z359 standards committees (among others) and am CEO of PMI. We manufacture and distribute life safety rope and equipment, and offer related training through our Vertical Rescue Solutions training arm, for a wide range of work and rescue applications, ranging from Fire-Rescue to Industrial Fall Protection, Mountain Rescue, Caving, and more.

In short, the general approach taken by most responding agencies (and standards developers, for that matter) is that emergency responders should be protected to at least the same level of protection as would be appropriate for the person(s) whom they might be called to rescue. If responding to a confined space emergency, they should be equipped with appropriate confined space PPE and equipment.  If responding to a cave emergency, they should be equipped with appropriate caving PPE and equipment. If responding to an industrial fall protection emergency, they should be equipped with appropriate emergency fall protection PPE and equipment. If responding to a mountaineering or climbing emergency, they should be equipped with appropriate mountaineering or climbing PPE and equipment… the list goes on, but you get the idea.

You will notice the phrase above, should be protected to at least the same level of protection… Let’s expound on that a little bit because there is a tendency in our society to lean toward a philosophy that “more is better” – which could erroneously lead to the idea that a full-body harness is better than a seat harness because there is more material there.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

“a very limited range of features that are unique to each type of harness”

Harnesses are designed for different applications with much, much more than just the “seat vs full body” question as consideration. For example:

• some of the more robust rescue harnesses will have a large, supportive waistbelt and a high front-waist attachment, to facilitate greater comfort in suspended operations.
• A caving harness, on the other hand, has a thinner, lighter waistbelt and a VERY low front-waist attachment, so that it adds minimal girth to the caver and works well with a chest harness to facilitate a range of ascending systems.
• A climbing harness will be somewhere between the two, with a front-waist attachment somewhere at or below belly-button level so that the body rotates around the center of gravity in the event of a lead-climbing fall.
• Industrial fall arrest harnesses have as their primary connection point a Dorsal D ring, for compliance with fall protection regulations, and a great deal of heavy metallic D rings for connection…
• and the list goes on.

So far we have addressed only a very limited range of features that are unique to each type of harness, but again I’m sure you get the idea.  I hope that you are also beginning to see that what is good for one application is, very specifically, often contraindicated for another.

So, depending on what the rescuer is doing, different types of rescue harnesses might be most appropriate.

>> Read Next Part

“A belay is a standard operating procedure”

The topic of belay in co-worker assisted rescue is one that tends to get people worked up, perhaps because so many of us have roots in professional rescue such as fire departments and rescue teams. A belay is a standard operating procedure in Professional Rescue environments, and a rescuer would scarcely think of performing a rescue without one.

On the surface, then, it would seem that employing a belay would only make sense in a workplace environment as well.

“This topic has been heavily debated in ANSI Z359.4 Subcommittee meetings”

From a practical perspective, however, this doesn’t always bear out. This topic has been heavily debated in ANSI Z359.4 Subcommittee meetings, and OSHA has addressed the matter as well at both state and federal levels. All end up at the same general premise: After a fall, the fallen worker needs to be rescued as safely and expeditiously as possible – but it is highly unlikely that use of a belay would be reasonably achievable in most such cases, and even where it may be feasible it may not be desirable.  The interpretation letter at OSHA website provides a nice overview.

Regulatory authorities and practitioners with the most experience seem to land at the same conclusion: Self-Rescue and Co-Worker Assisted Rescue practices may, but are not required to, include the use of some means of secondary belay. In fact, in some cases a belay could expose rescuers to additional hazard (e.g., where it would be precarious to attach a secondary system, where redundant systems may be likely to become entangled or create a snag, or where a belay could easily be inadvertently activated and leave the rescuer[s] and/or subject[s] in a precarious position).

“A belay should definitely be considered”

Careful consideration should be given to whether a given situation warrants the additional complexity and manpower for a belay. A belay should definitely be considered where:

• There is a high likelihood of failure of the main system.
• The primary raising/lowering system being used for rescue does not automatically stop/lock if the user lets go.
• The protection provided by the belay outweighs the potential hazards that the belay might create.

Belay systems are appropriate only when they protect against a credible threat, when it is safe to operate them, and when they prove to increase survivability for the rescuer and patient.

In short, there are pro’s and con’s to belaying… and while most organizations do favor the use of belays during training evolutions, in a real situation where self-rescue or co-worker assisted rescue is being performed, belay is optional.

BOKAT Rope Washer by PMI®

We got to try out my new 11mm Max Wear yesterday. It wasn’t a bad rappel or climb, but definitely not Sport Ez, Talon, or Extreme Pro. For what it’s designed for, ruggedness and durability, I think it shines; time will tell. Rope is on my mind this morning. Trying to pin down “the one” I like the most; and that’s a tough one.

11mm Extreme Pro– rappel is like butter! Super smooth through the rack; very easy to get over the lip with; but yet you need to be aware of just how easy it feeds. Definitely a fast rope to rappel on, and very smooth! The climb…… meh. Not my favorite to climb on. Very stretchy. I’m not a fan of the “bungie cord bounce” when climbing. The longer the drop, the more the bounce. It’s so lumber that to start climbing is a pain in the butt. Once you get 20’ ish off the ground it gets better from rope weight. Then ya bouncy bouncy bounce until you hit the 100’ ish mark and the stretch isn’t too bad and the bounce chills out; making the climb much better.

11mm Max Wear. It’s a beast. Ready to be dragged through caves, over rocks, through water, and just abused is it’s design. The rappel wasn’t bad, but certainly not “butter smooth”. A much stiffer rope, it doesn’t feed through the rack very good when going over the lip; gotta feed the rack some. Once over and free hanging it does fine. The climb? It’s “ok”, not as much stretch/bounce as the Extreme Pro, but close. The longer the drop, the more boing! Boing! You’ll go. It’ll work good for what I got it for; caving and dirty pit bouncing.

11mm Sport Ez– I didn’t think I would like this one as much as I do, now. It’s a good all around rope; and it’s actually one of my favorites now. We sell a ton of it; and during the Spring through Fall we make thousands of feet of it daily. The rappel is nice. It has a great happy medium getting over the lip and dropping. It feeds through the rack very well, and is nice for tying knots/rigging. Smooth rappel and makes it very smooth to control you bars; doesn’t give you that herky/jerky when using your bars to adjust your descent. The climb isn’t bad at all either. It has a little stretch at the start, but you can quickly get climbing after a couple steps. Has a ‘little’ bounce too it, but tolerable; for me…. Again, I didn’t think I’d like this one as much as I do. Turns out, I like it a lot. Definitely a “go to” rope and I bring it every time. 

11mm Talon* (available by special order) – I don’t think I’m as impressed with it as I am the 10mm Talon. I love my 10 mil. The 11mm I thought would of been better. Rigging/knot tying it does good, easy to use. Fairly smooth going over the lip and it feeds through the rack well, no “feeding the rack” with this one. Just sit yer butt back and go. Once on the free hang, it rappels nice; but, not as nice as I thought it would. Sport Ez and Extreme Pro are better; which surprised me. Where this rope shined is the climb. No stretch (at least at the 100’ level so far; it’s the biggest drop I’ve rigged it with, yet…), and the climb is fast and smooth. No bouncing, just flying straight up! There is no fumbling around on the first step either. You simply just get ya movin’!

I have a couple more ropes to make and try out. Definitely going to get some ISO Static in the 13mm and 11mm. Have a short 11mm and it handles very well on rappel and climb; just need to try it on a bigger drop. And the Access Pro… would like to try that. But for now, I do believe my “go to rope” would be the Sport Ez in the 11mm. Definitely Talon in 10mm.

I’ve lost track of how many feet of rope I have now, it has become a little addicting, but I enjoy getting to make these products AND get too use them. When your butt is hanging on a thread, it’s comforting to know where and how that rope was made. It’s also nice to be able to make custom colors and patterns. Seeing so much daily helps out with coming up with patterns. Love my Red/White/Blue colors and patterns, but I just might have ya get our standard Old Glory rope made, just to have one. Be a good add too the mix. 

Anywho….. I felt like yammering about rope since I got too try out the Max Wear yesterday. Going to switch to bagging my ropes (minus the max wear and pit ropes, still coil those), to save some wall space, and it’s a better way to stow them. Honey; we’re going to need a LOT of bags! 

I would also like to thank my wife, for not killing me for buying/making all this rope; and…… future, ropes…… While she does “face palm” and shake her head; she hasn’t killed me yet! 

In a recent study conducted by experts from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), NIH, UCLA, and Princeton University, investigators found that SARS-CoV-2 is detectable in aerosols for up to 3 hours, on copper up to 4 hours, up to 24 hours on cardboard, and up to 3 days on plastic and stainless steel.

Cleaning surfaces and equipment that are regularly touched or that may be exposed to germs can help reduce the spread. Recommendations from the CDC are to include cleaning AND disinfecting frequently touched surfaces first with detergent or soap and water, and then following this cleaning with disinfectant.

“choose a disinfectant appropriate for the material”

Most common EPA-registered household disinfectants will work, so choose a disinfectant appropriate for the material you are cleaning. If necessary, you may secure MSDS sheets from the cleaning solution manufacturer to identify what materials are damaged by that solution.

Some of the options include

• a dilute bleach solution (1/3rd cup bleach per gallon of water OR 4 teaspoons bleach per quart of water)
• A 70% alcohol solution

“bleach is known to weaken the fiber structure”

With any chemical compound there are several factors that will influence whether or not it will damage a given material. Of primary importance, of course, is simply the relationship between that compound and the material being cleaned. With this as a foundational context, actual damage can also be affected by concentration, duration of exposure, and temperature.

Although bleach is known to weaken the fiber structure of materials such as nylon and polyester, PMI has found that a single treatment of a mixture of up to 1 part household bleach (with active ingredient of Sodium hypochlorite at 5.25% concentration) with 9 parts room temperature tap water and a 10min or less exposure time, immediately followed by a thorough rinse of room temperature water will not cause appreciable harm to nylon or polyester ropes.

Likewise, plain rubbing alcohol can be a good cleaning agent that is generally mild enough to not damage or melt rope fibers, but again the alcohol solution must be thoroughly rinsed out of the material promptly so it doesn’t damage the material.  At high temperatures and under extended exposure conditions, nylon is known to be damaged by isopropyl alcohol.

“recommended method will not cause appreciable harm”

Keep in mind that the cumulative effects of frequent or repeated decontamination using these compounds has not been thoroughly studied, and should be undertaken with care.  Given the understanding that both bleach and alcohol can weaken the fiber structure of a rope, it only stands to reason that repeated treatments are likely to weaken the fiber structure even more. Although PMI’s testing suggests that a single disinfection using the recommended method will not cause appreciable harm to nylon or polyester ropes, if this process is repeated multiple times the damage will inevitably become appreciable, and this damage is not necessarily detectable through visual inspection.

Use and care of life safety products should not be undertaken lightly, and it can be difficult to make subjective decisions about the strength of rope and equipment without actually testing it to failure. The prudent course of action is to discard any rope about which there is any doubt.

For more information on chemical compatibility with nylon, visit calpaclab.com

Here at PMI we are committed to safety and compliance in equipment for work at height. In fact, we participate in several professional standards development efforts related to ropes, equipment, and training for high angle work and rescue.

In 1992 I was operating a research and testing lab called Alpine Center for Rescue Studies when Steve Hudson approached me and asked if I would represent PMI to the NFPA 1983 committee. Since then I have participated in this and several other NFPA committees including as chairman of NFPA 1958 and as an inaugural member of NFPA 1670.

Those of you who use, or are subject to, NFPA standards for rescue equipment, operations, and training should be aware of some upcoming changes to the NFPA standards that may impact your world.

—Watch the video or keep reading—

“Familiar documents”

A meeting was recently held to discuss the first draft of what will become an NFPA Consolidated Technical Rescue document, soon to be known as NFPA 2500. The official title of NFPA 2500 is: Standards for Operations and Training for Technical Search and Rescue Incidents and Life Safety Rope and Equipment for Emergency Services. Don’t let the fancy title throw you, though. This NFPA 2500 is nothing more than a bundled package containing three documents with which you are probably already familiar:

NFPA 1983 – Standard on Life Safety Rope and Equipment for Emergency Services

NFPA 1858 – Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of Life Safety Rope and Equipment for Emergency Services

And

NFPA 1670 – Standard on Operations and Training for Technical Search and Rescue Incidents

The first, most obvious question is WHY is NFPA doing this?!

“NFPA 2500 is nothing more than a bundled package”

NFPA’s theory in all of this is simple. They want to make the standards more user-friendly while at the same time making them less expensive and time consuming to develop. According to the NFPA website, they’ve got over 250 committees managing more than three hundred standards documents…  with requests on the table for at least a hundred more! By bundling like-documents related PPE and Pro Qual, they’ll be taking 116 separate documents and consolidating them down to 48 –  theoretically reducing the time investment and travel for meeting required by the more than 9,000 committee members who write them.

In implementing these changes, NFPA has acknowledged that there are two things firefighters hate:

1. change, and
2. when things stay the same.

So, with this in mind, they are going to accommodate all of us:

First, by changing the way the standards are packaged, and

Second, by keeping the existing reference numbers the same,

so if someone wants to implement just one of the standards in a group you can still do that.

“Combination of the three”

Chapter 1 of the new NFPA 2500 will be kind of an umbrella, outlining the scope of the entire document.  In chapter 1,  each of the existing standards: NFPA 1983, NFPA 1858, and NFPA 1670, will still be called out and identified by name, so your AHJ will be able to continue to adopt whatever it is you already use without having to change any terminology or numerical references. You can choose to adopt just NFPA 1983, just NFPA 1858,  just NFPA 1670, or some combination of the three.

“The meat of the document begins”

The way the new NFPA 2500 is organized you’ll find Chapters 1-3 just to be administrative oversite information. The new chapter 1 is just that high-level overview we talked about, explaining how the documents are bundled. Chapter 2 is nothing more than a list of references – same as it is now – and Chapter 3 is definitions. Then the meat of the document begins. Chapters 4-23 will be the content that you presently know as NFPA 1670.  It will still be called NFPA 1670, so if you presently use 1670 for Training and Operations you will still be able to do that. Chapters 24-28 will be the content that you presently know as NFPA 1983. Again, it will still carry the numerical designator NFPA 1983, so the equipment you’re buying will still have that reference number on it.

And, finally, Chapters 29-35 will be the content that you presently know as NFPA 1858.

“NFPA 1858 just released a year or so ago”

You might not even be familiar with this 1858 document yet, because it was just released a couple of years ago. It is designed to provide guidance for Selection, Care and Maintenance of NFPA 1983 Rope Rescue Equipment.

After this, you will find all of the Annexes and Reference Materials for all three of these documents.

Now, there’s just one thing we want to add, and that is: DON’T SHOOT THE MESSENGER!!!

Rest assured, this was not PMI’s idea! Although Loui McCurley from PMI has sat on the committee for more than 20 years, she is just one of many members. This action was mandated by the NFPA, not chosen by the committee… so committee members are just doing the best they can to try to catch NFPA’s VISION for this and carry it out in time for a GOOD standard to be produced in 2020. Although we didn’t create it, PMI is – as always – going to do our level best to walk with you, support you, and assist you in navigating this change with as little impact as possible on your organization.

We’d love to hear your comments and questions here, and will try to answer any specific questions you might have along the way.

Presenter: Steve Hudson | Webinar | 
The 2012 edition of NFPA 1983 Standard on Life Safety Rope and Equipment for Emergency Services is out! All manufacturers of these products will soon be required to certify their products to this new version of NFPA 1983. This webinar is a quick review of the major product additions and other changes to the previous edition published in 2006. Steve Hudson has been actively involved with the NFPA Technical Committee responsible for the creation of this and the previous four editions of NFPA 1983.

Presenter: Roger Mortimer | Webinar | 
This free webinar, presented by Roger Mortimer, MD, will further elaborate on the following Abstract: Suspension Trauma, alternatively called harness hang syndrome, harness induced pathology, or orthostatic intolerance has been described since the early 1970s. The syndrome is really more than one phenomenon, shock from blood pooling in the legs while passively suspended and muscle damage from poor circulation in the legs. The harness itself has been blamed for causing this but is really incidental. Previous literature has suggested that once rescued a person should not be laid down after rescue. This is contrary to standard care. Most authorities now concede that there was never any evidence for this recommendation. This recommendation has been withdrawn by occupational health authorities in England, Australia, and the USA. Once rescued from suspension a person should be laid flat just as one would treat any other trauma patient. The harness can be removed or left on as is helpful for final evacuation. Aggressive intravenous fluid therapy is appropriate to prevent kidney damage.

Presenter: Michael Croslin | Webinar | 

This PMI webinar is an update and review of the applications and general guidelines for line capture/Reach device in swiftwater rescue. Presented by Michael Croslin, owner of Crossline Solutions, he will also demonstrate and discuss the development of the Integrated Reach protection system and its expanded performance applications in moving water. This webinar will encourage an open collaborative discussion of the challenges in disseminating and encouraging curriculum updates and training protocols that promote clear and safe guidelines for effective adoption and responsible use of this exciting new approach in swiftwater rescue. Topics will include the new Integrated Reach Belt/Throwbag/Tagline system, The Reach Device, Entrapments, Pins, Sieves, Hydraulics, Catcher Mitt Eddies and new approaches to extrication. Additional topics that will be covered are: developing new downriver protection strategies, establishing cross river lines, stream crossings, gear retrieval and establishing remote connection to wrapped boats in extreme environments and Creeker or extreme kayaker or boater strategies using the Reach system. Specific examples and results of field testing by extreme boaters will also be discussed. Additionally, Michael will relate feedback from many early adopters that have developed new techniques and strategies based on remote connection/line capture. New collaborative ideas will be encouraged and welcomed, specifically, how this new technology is being used worldwide to improve rescuer and boater safety and to speed deployment of rope based systems in the river setting.