Issue: AALS believe, based on their inspections that the majority of peer and team belaying is of very high standard. Certainly when it becomes aware of belaying which is not of an acceptable standard it takes steps to ensure that this is addressed. Most instructors, whether trained and assessed by an NGB or in-house, perform competently and safely and are carefully managed by employers and managers. However serious accidents arising from poor practice still continue to occur. It is believed that there is a common thread to at least some of the reported incidents, accidents, and near-misses relating to the management or conduct of instructors after their validation to lead climbing sessions.
In this note ‘Peer Belaying’ is used to describe the practice of training participants at the start of a climbing or climbing related session to belay, and then using them as the belayer while other participants climb. “Team Belaying” is used as a specific case of this where more than one person is involved with belaying the climber. Many providers use this approach because it:
The main causes of accidents appear to be human error and are not generally the absence of competence or a lack of appropriate procedures. Significant factors are believed to include:
The Licensing Authority recognises that safety in the outdoors is largely due to good judgement by the instructor in charge in choosing and implementing the most appropriate techniques for the situation. To constrain that judgement would be counter-productive. This note sets out aspects of good practice in peer belaying and should be considered by providers in their implementation of peer belaying.
Indeed there may be benefit in mixing and matching a number of techniques, some of which are described below. Not all the systems described below are suitable for all client groups, venues or sessions. Consideration needs to be given to which is the most appropriate technique (or combination of techniques) for any given situation.
One person belays in a conventional manner, using either a friction device or an Italian Hitch, but the dead end of the rope is held by one or more other people. This may be the instructor, an assistant instructor, a competent adult or one or more students. N.B. It should be stressed that the actions of the tail forms the final safety back-stop and so their involvement needs to be emphasised as vital, not incidental.
One person (the bell-ringer) pulls the rope down as the climber climbs. Commonly a different person (the device operator) feeds the rope through the belay device or system and one or more people (the ‘tail’ or ‘tailer’) take in the loose end of the rope from the device operator and acts as a back up if the operator fails to hold the rope when needed. The bell-ringer may be best positioned to coordinate the activities of the belay team with those of the climber, advising both parties to continue or stop, as appropriate, or this may be the role of some other person.
The belay operator stands beneath the climber, facing outwards. Two or more people pull the rope through the device. The belay device operator may or may not be involved in pulling the rope towards the device.
Note: manufacturers refer to self braking devices. However the Licensing Service believes the term is misleading. In a similar way power steering on a car should not be referred to as “self steering”. In both cases the involvement of the operator is crucial – variation in use ranges from bell-ringing to solo belaying as in conventional one-to-one climbing. In the case of the latter, smaller children may need to use a “sailor’s haul” approach, i.e. lock off the device, sink at the knees, take in as they straighten up and or be secured to the ground.
These can be combined with some of the systems above, and can be used either as a direct or indirect belay.
This is not commonly found. The hitch is tied at the top karabiner (when the rope is placed) and thereafter operated by one (or more) people from the bottom.
The climber is attached to one end of the rope and a number of people (usually between 4 and 10) are attached to the other. As the climber climbs they move back, and as they move forward the climber is lowered.
Conventional one-to-one belaying with a friction device, self-braking device, or Italian Hitch, but no further back-up or tailing person – normally only used in the latter stages of a managed progression.
Different harnesses have different characteristics, so the arguments for and against may vary, or at times even be reversed.
The harness needs to be appropriate for the situation or client group. Whichever system is used staff need to be trained in its use. Some systems require longer to set up than others which will impact on the length of the session, a short session will require a system that is quick and simple to set up; i.e. either allow the system chosen to dictate the length of the session or let the length of the session dictate the system used. Fixing both the system and the time available will foreseeably lead to problems.
There is no need to stick to one system rigidly, so long as there are clear criteria for which method should be used for any particular situation;
Starting with one method does not preclude moving to another as part of a logical progression towards conventional one-to-one climbing and belaying, greater autonomy, etc.
It is largely academic whether the climber is climbing too fast or the belayer is belaying too slowly.
This is widely recognised as a crucial part of the process and can be the cause all sorts of problems, from encouraging the climber to down climb, or to weight the rope too slowly causing self-braking devices to slip or fail if not properly operated. This can also be needlessly frightening to the climber.
This has resulted in a number of incidents and injuries.
The risks with this need hardly be stated and the potentially severe consequences are obvious. However, this seems to have been a factor in at least some of the accidents that we know about.
There can be no justification for deploying an instructor who is not sufficiently competent. However, this is very rarely a factor. What has been found from time to time are instructors who are not effective, who try out inappropriate practices, or who lose concentration or are distracted;
The instructor’s previous validation or qualification will have established that they can do the job safely. However, management, where it exists, have a responsibility that vigilance is maintained. This can be achieved by field monitoring, i.e. observing the instructor operating from time to time, or by some other means. Responsibility for the on-going vigilance and competence of self-employed instructors resides with the instructor.
Supervising team belaying can be a difficult and challenging task, and should not be tackled lightly. It generally requires greater experience, awareness and judgement than the instructor doing all the belaying.
It also requires a level of strength and dexterity on the part of participants.
Management and employers have a responsibility to ensure that operational practices are in line not just with NGB good practice but also with their own preferences and requirements. Induction of even experienced instructors into the preferred ‘house style’ of operation will generally be appropriate.
This means the inappropriate positioning of hands, rope, feet, etc. Many of these, if not all, may have been satisfactory at the time of assessment or validation. However, other techniques may have been incorrectly picked up, and others lost, since then. Employers and managers have a responsibility to ensure that instructors maintain an appropriate level of competence. Self-employed instructors carry the same responsibility themselves, and may well be able to fulfil the requirement through contact with NGB’s and professional associations.
Rope positioning - most devices are designed for the rope to be pulled back to lock off (e.g. most belay plates). Therefore ensure the slack rope is piled behind the device operator, and or the tail stands behind the device operator. Conversely some systems require the rope to be pulled forward to lock off (e.g. Italian hitch), so ensure that in these cases the rope is piled in front of the device operator and or the tail stands in front of the device operator;
Positioning and stance of the belayer(s) - ensure that they are not too far out from the crag, and that everyone is braced ready to hold a fall in the direction of pull;
Gri-gris - these devices can cause problems if incorrectly used. This seems mostly to be caused by a false belief that they are ‘fail-safe’. They are not. There is a strong argument that provided a tail is used they have no advantages over a conventional belay plate and several disadvantages. There is currently a trend for peers to belay during climbing but for the instructor to take over for the lowering. The Licensing Authority is satisfied that provided appropriate care is taken there should be no need for the instructor to take over.
This issue is well documented by National Governing Bodies and the trade press.
Unless the instructor has their hands on the rope then their voice and language are the only control mechanism they have.
Team belaying can be operated effectively and safely and there is no reason why it should not form the basis of many or most climbing or climbing related sessions at licensed centres.
Appropriate training is essential. Most accidents, incidents and near misses we are aware of seem to suggest that the belayer or climber did not know what they should be doing, or were not able to do it, or both. In the same way as a bouldering session now often precedes a climbing session (either immediately before or the day before), so there seems to be scope for a training session on tying in, tying on and belaying before the climbing begins.
Supervising team belaying session requires increased vigilance as the participants become more competent. Bored children quickly become inquisitive children, sometimes with unintended consequences.
There is a great benefit for the climber to practice being lowered and even falling off at a suitable spot not far up the climb. Ensure however that the climber cannot hit the ground on rope stretch.
Monitoring is an integral part of ensuring the continuation of instructor competence and should apply to all staff from time to time.
There is considerable benefit, as part of staff training and development, in setting up simulated accident and incident scenarios in a controlled and safe environment. This is an ideal way for management to satisfy themselves that their procedures are adequate and for staff to practice seldom used skills.
There is evidence to suggest that some instructors focus their attention more on the climbers than on the peer belayers, thus potentially missing the start of anything going amiss. Significant focus on young/novice belayers at all times is paramount.
1. Over the last few years the Licensing Service has identified weaknesses and potential weaknesses resulting in poor communication between the climber and the belayer(s) in a top/bottom roping situation, with particular attention to peer belaying.
2. The aim of any system of calls should be, to be:
3. At the base of the climb, prior to starting climb the climber turns to the belayer(s); holds the rope up and out revealing the krab and knot (or just the knot) for belayer(s) to see.
Climber: “Check”
4. Belayers check that they are ready to belay and respond “Climb when you’re ready”
5. Climber starts climbing until the top or high point of the climb is reached, or feel that they may fall off.
Climber: "At the top", or “Take” or “Tight Rope”
(No calls are necessary if the climber actually falls off. Belayers should therefore anticipate that this might happen without warning.)
6. Belayers make any rearrangements necessary. In particular they take in the rope until it is tight. When the rope comes tight the climber shouts “That’s me”.
7. Belayer (or belay team coordinator) checks that the belayer(s) are ready to descend, perhaps checks with the instructor, etc, as appropriate then shouts: "Descend when you’re ready".
8. Belayers actively anticipating the climbers weight coming on the rope. Climber lowers their weight onto the rope.
Climber: "Down".
9. Climber anticipates being lowered.
Belayer (or belay team coordinator): “OK!” and starts to lower.
10. If the Climber needs to stop on the way down, the Climber shouts "Hold!"
Belayers halt descent, until the Climber shouts: “Down!”
11. Belayers recommence lower until climber reaches the bottom.
12. Also on the subject of the spoken word it would be nice to see session leaders making better use of what they say and putting more thought into how they say it. It has been pointed out, and seemed blatantly obvious when it was, that when the instructor doesn’t have a hand actually holding the rope then their voice is their only mechanism of control. Accidents happen far too quickly for any notion of grabbing an already moving rope to be realistic.
