The flying Hernandez


A FREELANCE tree-trimmer does his work for a neighbor three doors down from the Hacienda.

He’s 30 feet or more above the ground. I see no supports, and you can bet there’s no net below. I have no idea how he got up there or how he got down.

He started the work the previous day with a chainsaw, and now he’s fine-tuning with the all-purpose machete.

I wonder what OSHA would make of this.

This photo and others are at their new home here.

27 thoughts on “The flying Hernandez

  1. Mr Z, your photo stream is among the very best I have seen! Tasteful borders, sharp, perfect contrast. Your choice of grayscale makes your subject material more interesting than it may have been if rendered in color. Keep ’em coming.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I have always enjoyed B&W photography, even going back to the old days when I developed them myself in the darkroom. For some reason the resolution always seems sharper on them than color photos. The detail is pronounced. Great photos!


  3. Kind of a paradox for the conservative thinkers on this board. Here he is, unencumbered by OSHA rules, but if he falls he is basically on his own. And you can bet there’s no safety net for him if he is injured. His burden will not be shared by society as a whole but by his family if he is lucky enough to have one. But that isn’t what you meant by not having a net.

    On the other hand, back in the U.S.A., OHSA’s main objective is to ensure the safety of workers thus avoiding pain and suffering of the individual but also to minimize the odds they will need financial assistance provided by the government. Republicans, ardent deregulators fervently trying to reduce government’s providing social welfare are also hellbent on eliminating these social safety nets that will assist in providing for someone in need.


    1. Clete: It’s a dilemma indeed. There is a happy middle ground between people being left totally on their own and a meddling government with its nose in as many aspects of the citizens’ lives as possible. I contend that right now the U.S. government leans very much toward the latter, and it does it often very, very badly.

      A correct balance will never be perfected because governments tend to grow and grow and grow, given the chance. That is very evident, to conservatives at least, in the United States these days.


  4. “Social safety net?” You’ve got to be kidding me. There is no need for “balance.” I am a free individual, responsible for my own actions. I don’t need a government agency (which is not elected) to tell me how to best trim trees or anything otherwise. If I endanger myself, it is my choice.


    1. Ray: I think one of the duties of a good government is to provide options for the really needy in some situations. At times people do fall on drastic times by absolutely no fault of their own whatsoever. That’s where government or, preferably, private charities should step in.

      But you are quite right that government should not be telling you how to trim trees or gadzillions of other things government tells you in the U.S. these days. Funny you should mention unelected government agencies. That growing problem is one of the biggest issues in America these days, agencies that essentially answer to no one. They grow more despotic by the day.


  5. OK, governments require inspections of new construction in order to insure building code compliance. An important part of these codes is to minimize the risk of fire. And this minimizes the risk to lives and property. And some of those lives belong to firemen. But Ray doesn’t need the government telling him what he can do in his own home. So according to his beliefs, he can run bare wires, not insulate and isolate his hot water heater, hell he should be able to build a fire pit in the middle of the living room if that pleases him.

    But he better have 911 on quick dial.


    1. Clete: Yep, Ray should be able to run bare wires, not insulate and isolate his water heater, and he should be able to build a fire pit in the middle of the living room as long as none of it endangers his neighbors. Since he lives, I believe, somewhat in the boonies, I imagine he’s home free, and should be.

      Less government is best government.


      1. That’s the kicker isn’t it? Endanger other people. Most people have neighbors near enough a house fire in one home endangers those nearby.

        How about this for a blog name? “Wingnuts Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Wire Nuts.”


  6. Now, now gents. Discourse requires opposing, or at least differing, points of view. Is it not best to debate rather than argue? (And please, without the name calling that happens here NOB.)

    Gracias Señores.


    1. Scott: I, of course, do not name-call, ever. And I don’t really spot anybody else name-calling in the above exchange. So we’re firmly in your debate category, a useless debate, but so be it.


      1. Felipe, Apologies. I thought maybe things were going down a rabbit hole when your friend asked if he should comment elsewhere. Neither of you had done any name calling.

        But yes, politics rears its ugly head in seemingly unpolitical observations. I blame the Internet. NOB, usually within 5 comments someone turns an otherwise interesting exchange on mundane topics such as bird migration, asteroids or gardening into a flame war blaming W or Obummer. Truly sad.


        1. Scott: Clete is more of an internet acquaintance than a friend, I would say. His wondering if he should comment elsewhere was a reference to my wondering if they weren’t missing his comments on Mother Jones or Huffpost, which are websites more in keeping with his views.

          I was being a bit snide, of course, but I wouldn’t dub it name-calling.

          Yes, I’m aware of internet sewage. It’s a lamentable thing which has no solution. Just part of our troubled world these days.


  7. Come now, Pipe. The comments section most certainly started out about photography but the blog post was about how a tree climber skillfully avoids severe injury or death.

    It is a nice snapshot, though.


  8. Is there such a thing as OSHA in Mexico? Or, more importantly, is there a “social safety net” in Mexico? If not, is that a bad or good thing? I suppose Mr. Clete would say it is most terrible.


    1. Becky: If there is some sort of OSHA in Mexico, it doesn’t do much. We have a you’re-on-your-own attitude down here. We also have lots of laws about many things that we roundly ignore on a regular basis.

      Is it a good or bad thing? I imagine it depends on the person you ask. I’m rather neutral about it. OSHA, like most U.S. regulatory agencies, tends, I think, to go overboard, but I imagine it does good things sometimes.


Comments are closed.