"Universal" Belay Certification

Jake Jones wrote:I see where you're going, and there is a ring of truth to what you say, but I can tell you that gyms, at least the one I work in, cares about people not jacking themselves up, and not just because we don't want to be sued. If you've ever had to scrape someone up off the deck gingerly while they're writhing in pain, then you know it extends a bit past liability. No one wants to deal with that shit. It's a drag.

Agreed entirely. If this program helps create a cultural shift that eliminates some careless errors I'll consider it a major success. However, I know I'll never be happy knowing that people I've never met are approving people to belay in a facility I run. I doubt the AAC is intending to shift liability from gyms in a legal sense, and they certainly can't simply eliminate any moral concerns that I have with operating a recreational space in this proposed manner.

shotwell wrote: Sure thing, I do a similar thing with CWI certification now....

It makes sense to me that the climbing wall industry would at least consider this - it would certainly be convenient for some of their young, professional customers. But that still leaves me wondering why the AAC needs to involve itself in "universal certification?"

ViperScale wrote:Lets face it gyms could care less about belay certifications. They only require it because they need to for insurance reasons. All it would take is "global certification" that all insurance companies accept that would make them not liable and it is done. When the insurance companies are ready to accept it than the gyms will as well.

I am all for personal responsibility in climbing and would prefer self certification like the U.K. and Germany. That said, it isn't the insurance companies that dictate best practices in the Us gym Indus try. These practices are developed by businesses to react to court rulings on recreational liability, negligence, etc. Eventually, some insurance companies codified standards in collaboration with industry organizations. However, the belay test long predates that.

To clarify, an insurance company cannot absolve you of liability. You could possibly carry so much coverage that you would effectively be absolved in situations where you followed best practices, but liability is determined in court. For example, the coverage limit for your auto insurance is the maximum amount which your insurance company will pay if you are found to be liable. If you carry 100k in liability coverage but are found to be liable for 200k in damages, you are on the hook for half.

In the case of a UBC, I would possibly have to sue the AAC in the event of an accident at the will of my insurance company. They may have to sue the 'certifying gym' to pass the liability to who they consider responsible. This becomes a mess very quickly.

Doug Hemken wrote: It makes sense to me that the climbing wall industry would at least consider this - it would certainly be convenient for some of their young, professional customers. But that still leaves me wondering why the AAC needs to involve itself in "universal certification?"

I would find it personally convenient, even if I have grave misgivings about how our litigious society will apportion liability in the event of an accident.

What good is the Universal Belay card without a security ribbon (like the $100 bill), photograph, and a thumb print???
I can't get my scuba tanks refilled without my Padi/Naui card, so in the future will the purchase of a belay device and/or climbing rope require a Universal Belay card? Perhaps the sitting hip belay will come back into vogue??

slim wrote:hmmm, they should probably add a "UBS don't lower me off the end of the rope" certification.

Wasn't closing the system part of the UBC?

Doug Hemken wrote:But that still leaves me wondering why the AAC needs to involve itself in "universal certification?"

$ for AAC members, $$$ for non-members?

Quotes from this thread (for posterity):

"Or maybe I won't be able to climb at places like the Gunks unless I have one of these? Perhaps there will be a safety committee that will order me off the route?"

"The belay methods taught are sound but certification is a slippery slope to licensing by land managers."

"Give it a year or two and California will be requiring one of these in order to climb on public land."

"That's an interesting idea, but I don't believe the AAC's intent is limited to the gym here. I suspect they're targeting the gym industry as an initial step in launching the program for some good reasons....If they can convince the actuaries that the curriculum reduces accident rates appreciably, they'd potentially have a huge carrot (in the form of reduced insurance premiums) to dangle in front of other user groups and so increase adoption."

"But actually I could imagine the Preserve requiring AAC beay certification if their insurers told them they had to."

"I can't believe a believe a this is even a thing. My head hurts from banging it on my desk."

Me, too.

This is a terrible idea. If the ACC wanted to make a standard and push that, I would be okay with that. But an actual certificate, no.

Ted Pinson wrote: Wasn't closing the system part of the UBC?

well, it would be ironic if it wasnt.

Still don't see why so many people are against this type of thing. The only affect it would have on you would be you wouldn't have to retest every single gym you go to.

If I am climbing with someone I don't know I am still going to make sure they know what they are doing whether they pass a local gym test, universal test, or whether they have never been to a gym. I will still belay the same way I want to at any gym (given some of them have strange rules that may affect how they let you belay)

So what practical reason can anyone give on why this would be bad for them? They think new people will get taught some bad way to belay or something? Heck I know gyms I have been to or seen how they teach belaying and I tell the new people I go there with to do what they say to pass the test than I will show you how to really do it for the real world.

It is like requiring a driver's license. Because everyone with a driver's license is a great driver, right???

ViperScale wrote:Still don't see why so many people are against this type of thing. The only affect it would have on you would be you wouldn't have to retest every single gym you go to.

Proper training to a correct standard is a good thing. But, a certificate/card/license is a path that leads to regulation. Which in gyms would be OK. Unfortunately, things like that tend to get extended to public lands and preserves.

ViperScale wrote:I will still belay the same way I want to at any gym (given some of them have strange rules that may affect how they let you belay)

Then why even have certification if people are going to do what they damn well please anyways?

wivanoff wrote: Then why even have certification if people are going to do what they damn well please anyways?

Good point. Almost everyone knows how to belay by the time they're doing it outside. It's more about habits and being attentive. You show me the most distracted belayers at the cliffs and I'll bet they could easily pass a test when they know they're being scrutinized.

They have had padi and dan scuba diving license for years. This doesn't stop anyone without a license from jumping in the ocean / lake and diving without them. They are only there if you want to take a boat out with a commercial dive shop (no different than going to a commercial gym).

The chances of this getting pushed into being required to climb outside is unlikely. Even if it was I still don't even completely see a problem with that personally as long as you only need 1 per group since taking out friends / new people would be a nightmare if they had to get licensed as well.

None of this is about making sure people belay properly. It is only about trying to make sure people know how to so if something goes wrong we know where to put the blame (aka distracted belayer etc).

Comparisons with scuba certification and driver licensing are a little misleading. Doing scuba without getting into trouble is more technically demanding than belaying. And beginning drivers get in orders of magnitude more accidents than beginning belayers.

Doug Hemken wrote:Comparisons with scuba certification and driver licensing are a little misleading. Doing scuba without getting into trouble is more technically demanding than belaying. And beginning drivers get in orders of magnitude more accidents than beginning belayers.

I am not comparing the activities I am comparing the fact that even after all these years you still don't have to have any type of license to scuba dive.

Anyone can go to a dive shop buy all the gear and go jump in a lake, perfectly legal. So why are we worried about a belay license being required to go outside to climb? If anything that should be in support of global belay certification so I don't have to take a test at every gym I go to, it will have no affect on what I do outside and only benefit me if I want to go to a new gym.

ViperScale wrote:They have had padi and dan scuba diving license for years. This doesn't stop anyone without a license from jumping in the ocean / lake and diving without them. They are only there if you want to take a boat out with a commercial dive shop (no different than going to a commercial gym). The chances of this getting pushed into being required to climb outside is unlikely. Even if it was I still don't even completely see a problem with that personally as long as you only need 1 per group since taking out friends / new people would be a nightmare if they had to get licensed as well. None of this is about making sure people belay properly. It is only about trying to make sure people know how to so if something goes wrong we know where to put the blame (aka distracted belayer etc).

SCUBA diving certs do indirectly prevent un-certified divers from jumping into the ocean or a lake. It is pretty difficult to get a SCUBA tank filled without a cert card. Un-certified recreational divers are very rare. Also, if you aren't allowed on a dive boat, you are missing out on many of the best diving opportunities out there. Saying divers are allowed to dive without a cert is like saying you can climb without a cert, but you can't climb anywhere with an approach longer than 10min.

I don't think we should draw too many parallels between SCUBA and climbing certs. SCUBA certs have been around pretty much as long as recreational diving has existed. And as someone else mentioned, SCUBA certs are a necessity for safety.

I'm not arguing for or against climbing certs though.

You can buy your own refill kit they don't cost that much. I have dove in plenty of areas that would not have required a certification. All you need is a small fishing boat, gear, etc.

You can take your own boat out to anywhere that a commercial dive boat would go. Been there done that, given the average person will go dive a few times a year and won't likely have their own boat. I have over 500 hours of dive time and have taken plenty of unlicensed people out to dive.

The real difference would be needing a license to go out with a guide who provides you with all your own gear vs having no license and hiking up with friends and your own gear to climb (which is what we already do).

Anne McLaughlin wrote:I love this idea! I trust the AAC much more than individual gyms. ....

I've always found solid partners meeting up through an AAC event or Ranch.

I think the fundamental problem with a universal belay certificate is that possessing that certificate is only an indicator that some gym, somewhere had a minimum-wage employee sign off that you passed that particular employee's certification test.

If there were something like well paid, certified climbing instructors doing all of the tests, that would be one thing. Having someone with mountain guide level expertise signing off that you're a competent belayer would be fine, and would represent a higher standard than most gym belay tests. That's how PADI certification works, and for the most part, that works out well.

That's not what this is, and that's not going to happen with climbing gyms. Not with TR certification that your average gym wants to crank through in less than 30 minutes for an off the street never climbed before customer.

I could see something like this working, but only if it were on par with what you need to show for a PADI open water cert: basic competency in all aspects of gym climbing. Demonstrate good ability to lead climb and lead belay, pass a basic test, and climb and belay for 5 climbs each in front of a trained instructor. I could see, in that case, gyms allowing someone with an AAC gym climbing certification being ok to skip belay tests at gyms around the country, but as a replacement for a card you get after a 30 minute TR lesson? Better to leave it to the guys at the next gym to see if mr. enthusiastic gumby is in danger of killing his partner.