# Certified Tree Risk Assessor



## Mike Cantolina (Oct 20, 2011)

I wanted to ask you guys who have studied for or taken the exam if any of the material covered trees uprooting on hill/creek sides?

I've already agreed on removing x amount of trees here because they've had two trees uproot and hit buildings. How would a Certified Tree Risk Assessor approach a job like this?


----------



## lxt (Oct 21, 2011)

Havent taken the test & probably wont............Have so many certs & licenses right now it just takes to much time & money to keep up with it all, I doubt that a tree risk assessor would do/prognose any different from what you would!!

As long as you have been doing this.............your response to the situation is probably just as good if not better that someone with that particular Cert.

IMHO


LXT.................


----------



## treevet (Oct 21, 2011)

:monkey:


lxt said:


> Havent taken the test & probably wont............Have so many certs & licenses right now it just takes to much time & money to keep up with it all, I doubt that a tree risk assessor would do/prognose any different from what you would!!
> 
> As long as you have been doing this.............your response to the situation is probably just as good if not better that someone with that particular Cert.
> 
> ...


----------



## fdoberman (Oct 21, 2011)

"Certified Tree Risk Assessor" is that Dutchie for somebody who spent too much time drinking beer in a dorm room, or is that the nomenclature for somebody looking to get his name onthe Defendant line of a Summons & Complaint?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say he will approach it with a clipboard and large insurance policy, and probably get there in either a Prius or a pickup truck.


----------



## mr. holden wood (Oct 21, 2011)

lxt said:


> Havent taken the test & probably wont............Have so many certs & licenses right now it just takes to much time & money to keep up with it all, I doubt that a tree risk assessor would do/prognose any different from what you would!!
> 
> As long as you have been doing this.............your response to the situation is probably just as good if not better that someone with that particular Cert.
> 
> ...


 
Ignorance is bliss my friend. It's a multiday test thats goes into technical detail beyond what you can learn from seeing downed trees over the years. On my to do list, this year. You can not remove any tree in the seattle area over 30 inch's without this cert and I can see most major cities adopting the same policy, which i'm in favor. At some point we need to limit the amount of urban removals or the next generation will be left with nothing more then Japanese maples.


----------



## treevet (Oct 22, 2011)

mr. holden wood said:


> Ignorance is bliss my friend. It's a multiday test thats goes into technical detail beyond what you can learn from seeing downed trees over the years. On my to do list, this year. You can not remove any tree in the seattle area over 30 inch's without this cert and I can see most major cities adopting the same policy, which i'm in favor. At some point we need to limit the amount of urban removals or the next generation will be left with nothing more then Japanese maples.


 
Hey Holden, you know Terry Flanigan, BCMA from PNW chapter did the seminar and travels all over the world doing it? Great guy to hang out with for couple of days..

There are 700 TRACE certs. now incl. many Chinese.

Hey Mike, don't think you are going to get anyone to bite on this OP. After shelling out the 550 clams and studying and doing the 2 day gig and qualifying by having plenty of knowledge prior to even being able to take the course all along with req. ISA Cert.....not likely anyone is gonna give assessments for free with this system.


----------



## Mike Cantolina (Oct 22, 2011)

treevet said:


> Hey Mike, don't think you are going to get anyone to bite on this OP. After shelling out the 550 clams and studying and doing the 2 day gig and qualifying by having plenty of knowledge prior to even being able to take the course all along with req. ISA Cert.....not likely anyone is gonna give assessments for free with this system.


 
I can understand that. The work to be done is already agreed upon.

I would really like to know if uprooting near hill/creek sides is covered though.


----------



## Mike Cantolina (Oct 22, 2011)

I guess I could just order the study material.


----------



## treevet (Oct 22, 2011)

Yes, uprooting and hillsides and water affecting soil integrity and edge trees and leaners and long lever arms and bending moment and taper....all factors in overall assessment with many others as part of system.


----------



## Mike Cantolina (Oct 22, 2011)

I can see where lxt is coming from but it does sound like a good cert then.


----------



## troythetreeman (Oct 22, 2011)

mr. holden wood said:


> At some point we need to limit the amount of urban removals or the next generation will be left with nothing more then Japanese maples.


 
i would consider myself a conservationist, i often advise against removals or question motives
but im also an American, and a tree is property and i believe a person should be able to do with their property as they please, the government has poked its nose into too much already
corporations on the other hand should have over site


----------



## lxt (Oct 22, 2011)

mr. holden wood said:


> Ignorance is bliss my friend. It's a multiday test thats goes into technical detail beyond what you can learn from seeing downed trees over the years. On my to do list, this year. You can not remove any tree in the seattle area over 30 inch's without this cert and I can see most major cities adopting the same policy, which i'm in favor. At some point we need to limit the amount of urban removals or the next generation will be left with nothing more then Japanese maples.


 
Im not trying to be ignorant.............Its just common sense!!!! & to create another Cert for a tree over 30 inches is just as bad as AA using his lawn mower! Wouldnt a removal permit & a city arborist/tree warden be just as effective?

Who is gonna teach this course? & you want me to believe that some one in the Biz for 25yrs or more doesnt have the ability to properly assess a trees risk?..........Bunk I say & this is where things are just getting absolutely ridiculous.........First it was a CA...Now its a BMCA......Now a Tree risk Assessor........does anyone recall a thread years ago where I said "why dont they just create a galactic arborist certification?" Cause pretty soon you will need so many Certs that one of two things are gonna happen: 1-your hourly wage will continue to go down due to paying for multiiple certs/licenses along with acquiring less work, 2- in this economy you will not make up the difference cuz people can barely afford the rates now & they will just let their trees go!

I cant imagine...............sorry Ma`am your tree is 30.25 inches & this requires a certified tree risk assessor... LMFAO, on top of that ma`am you will need a permit, you will have to replant a tree to make up for the loss......oh, powerlines over head, you will need a Line clearance qualified person.....................eh, should only cost tween 3-4 thousand for your 30 ft norway removal...do you want the wood?




LXT...................


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 22, 2011)

lxt said:


> Im not trying to be ignorant.............Its just common sense!!!! & to create another Cert for a tree over 30 inches is just as bad as AA using his lawn mower! Wouldnt a removal permit & a city arborist/tree warden be just as effective?
> 
> Who is gonna teach this course? & you want me to believe that some one in the Biz for 25yrs or more doesnt have the ability to properly assess a trees risk?..........Bunk I say & this is where things are just getting absolutely ridiculous.........First it was a CA...Now its a BMCA......Now a Tree risk Assessor........does anyone recall a thread years ago where I said "why dont they just create a galactic arborist certification?" Cause pretty soon you will need so many Certs that one of two things are gonna happen: 1-your hourly wage will continue to go down due to paying for multiiple certs/licenses along with acquiring less work, 2- in this economy you will not make up the difference cuz people can barely afford the rates now & they will just let their trees go!
> 
> ...


 I gotta say your growing on me quick thats a great point and a great post , I mean when will it stop we need our hands held by some D Bag with a slip to tell me when a tree may be ####ed up and have to go ... My God I can see a bad tree from the window of my truck at this point ....


----------



## treemandan (Oct 22, 2011)

mr. holden wood said:


> Ignorance is bliss my friend. It's a multiday test thats goes into technical detail beyond what you can learn from seeing downed trees over the years. On my to do list, this year. You can not remove any tree in the seattle area over 30 inch's without this cert and I can see most major cities adopting the same policy, which i'm in favor. At some point we need to limit the amount of urban removals or the next generation will be left with nothing more then Japanese maples.


 
Oh I am looking for that bliss. I'm kinda mad, resentful that I ain't stupid and I'm living for the day they all are Japanese maples.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 22, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


> ... My God I can see a bad tree from the window of my truck at this point ....



That point of view is exactly why this training is needed. :taped:

The course also mentions MITIGATION; work like pruning those edge trees to improve stability. This work may take more skill, but it does preserve the asset for the owner, so it is worth considering.

Those tree owners agreed to let you rape their hillside?

There's one born every minute. :jester:


----------



## Mike Cantolina (Oct 22, 2011)

treeseer said:


> Those tree owners agreed to let you rape their hillside?


 
What gives you that idea?


----------



## treevet (Oct 22, 2011)

This forum is getting dumber and dumber in leaps and bounds. I get pm's all the time wishing it was like it used to be when there was intellectual conversation. The convicts are taking over the jail. And they are world class dumb.

This cert gives a systemmatic routine for assessing the ones a dummy cannot id from the window. The one that is gonna fall and kill somebody that your basic knucklehead (you know who you are) can't see. Also protects against the millions and millions of trees continuing to be removed that really do not need to be removed and are just paying for 6 packs and filling bloated dummy guts.

2 men were at the seminar from Atlanta who are the ones in the whole giant city you have to go through to have any (any public or private) tree removed ....you must get a permit from them first. Coming to your neighborhood soon. Either move with the times or get left behind in a ditch (where you likely belong). Get certed and get recognized as knowing how to rate an extreme risk tree prior to making a sound, intelligent, educated decision. Or know when to leave them alone or mitigate risks (and how to) so future generations can appreciate and benefit from them.


----------



## ForTheArborist (Oct 22, 2011)

I know the cert. testers know everything treevet said, and they have to figure that there is no shortage of tree services. No shortage means they can raise the bar in the community, and the community will still have plenty of qualified services working after all; with the certs. But HO's are not in short supply either, so the population of 'mental short hops' are still going to be able get by anyway. 

I'm like a stick in the arborist industry, but tell me, any completely accredited arborist, how many hours or days out of the year does it take to get all of the certs finished. And how much is the bill for it all? The lesson of the day if you don't mind saying.


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 22, 2011)

I'm like a twig in the arborist industry, but my take on this is that a tree plus a target = a potential hazard. Period.
Who here is going to tell a client that a tree is "safe"? (exception being them bonzai Japanese maples)?
The millions of healthy trees that got removed paid off my mortgage, dammit.


----------



## treesandsurf (Oct 23, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> I'm like a twig in the arborist industry, but my take on this is that a tree plus a target = a potential hazard. Period.
> Who here is going to tell a client that a tree is "safe"? (exception being them bonzai Japanese maples)?
> The millions of healthy trees that got removed paid off my mortgage, dammit.



Fortunately there are people out there willing to spend money to preserve trees, even those that may have been quickly condemned by the drive-by tree guy :msp_scared:. 

The TRACE program is worth taking for the education itself. The cert is probably usefull/less depending on your location. 

jp


----------



## ForTheArborist (Oct 23, 2011)

treesandsurf said:


> Fortunately there are people out there willing to spend money to preserve trees, even those that may have been quickly condemned by the drive-by tree guy :msp_scared:.
> 
> The TRACE program is worth taking for the education itself. The cert is probably usefull/less depending on your location.
> 
> jp


 
Maybe the people that just don't like the tops of trees won't care bout no certs. I probably should have it around here if it even applies here. I'll look later.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

Wow I love the enthusiasm of this thread there are some real heavy blowhards now weighing in , The truth of the matter is you can sugar coat anything you want but when a tree needs to go its gotta go ... And I am not saying that I am a drive by estimator but there are times where its that simple .... And I doubt any of these blow hards would sign a piece of paper guaranteeing that a tree is safe so whats the point its just a chest beating worthless topic , and if you do guarantee the tree stand up and be heard I would love some insight on that LOL 1000xs , I am sure your insurance agent would love to hear that along with your lawyer ...


----------



## treevet (Oct 23, 2011)

Seems on this forum if you want to represent that you are an "arborist" what you do is wet yourself all over about a guy spiking up a prune or cutting some top off of a tree and that takes care of it and that is all the knowledge you need or are ever going to get.:monkey:

Where is the difference in the guy in Ohio that had all the dangerous animals that let them loose and the guy that has all the dangerous trees threatening his neighbor's property?

Hey if you want to kill yourself....more power to ya. But if you aren't caring about killing your neighbors and visitors...time for intervention with some smart inspections.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 23, 2011)

"There are some real heavy blowhards now weighing in". Lol, that's good one. I was actually thinking the same thing to myself this morning while looking over this thread. 

opcorn:


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

treevet said:


> Seems on this forum if you want to represent that you are an "arborist" what you do is wet yourself all over about a guy spiking up a prune or cutting some top off of a tree and that takes care of it and that is all the knowledge you need or are ever going to get.:monkey:
> 
> Where is the difference in the guy in Ohio that had all the dangerous animals that let them loose and the guy that has all the dangerous trees threatening his neighbor's property?
> 
> Hey if you want to kill yourself....more power to ya. But if you aren't caring about killing your neighbors and visitors...time for intervention with some smart inspections.


 
My inspection in that reguard are as follows: hey ED this mutha ####### trees are hanging over my house dropping #### in MY yard shading my pool I have asked him for the last 5 years to do something about it, now I am through asking what can you do for me " end quote ... And my response is lets trim them back , lets not HACK them to the point where there gonna die and here is what its gonna cost MR .SMO ... I mean maybe I am missing something but 90% of customers ALREADY know what they want they will only accept a viable option at accomplishing the ends to there means and thats where the REAL HACKS are seperated from those who paint there trucks with rollers , anyway ... No PUN intended to anyone in particular


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

tree MDS said:


> "There are some real heavy blowhards now weighing in". Lol, that's good one. I was actually thinking the same thing to myself this morning while looking over this thread.
> 
> opcorn:


 
I am gonna say this flat out , there is a guy here that only has this opinion about tree conservation now because he's busy but come FEB when his #### has been parked for a while costing him money his standards of a safe tree will drastically drop quick , at least I am the way I am 12 months of the year I don't change with the WORK BACKLOG...


----------



## treevet (Oct 23, 2011)

I cannot hardly contain the pleasure in saying what you 2 guys say about this program/system/accredation amounts to zero point shat. You 2 are the purest form of example of the losers this change in arboricultural history will affect. Couldn't find a better example on AS.

This is happening as we speak, no denying, debating or challenging it. You 2 cannot even take the program as you have to be a CA to take it and you have to have knowledge beyond that to pass it. Good luck in future change in careers. :msp_thumbsup: Wish the best for ya. Painting might be a good option lol.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 23, 2011)

Here's some pics from that ash we did last week. After finishing this tree I have to say it was much more sturdy than I thought. I kinda felt bad because the customer seemed all busted up about losing it. The reality is it could have lasted years, or came down on the neighbor's house next week. notice I said neighbor's house, not the customer that was crying about lsing the piece of crap. But I look at it this way, am I gonna lose work and risk the thing coming down on the house, or worse yet a person? No, sorry, I'm just not that much of a tree hugger.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

tree MDS said:


> Here's some pics from that ash we did last week. After finishing this tree I have to say it was much more sturdy than I thought. I kinda felt bad because the customer seemed all busted up about losing it. The reality is it could have lasted years, or came down on the neighbor's house next week. notice I said neighbor's house, not the customer that was crying about lsing the piece of crap. But I look at it this way, am I gonna lose work and risk the thing coming down on the house, or worse yet a person? No, sorry, I'm just not that much of a tree hugger.


 
Watch out the future asspressers of the industry are reading this thread ... Ha what a joke I mean its comical at this point , I will be dead and buried along time before things around here change drastically I will have my 6 year old son read this thread at 25 and laugh like little school kids together , and as far as the licenses when I have to get one I get it I haven't lost a day of work yet because of it.. Oh and for whom this concerns I will tip a 40 to ya on your headstone when your pipedream comes to frutition because you'll probably be gone lol


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 23, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


> Watch out the future asspressers of the industry are reading this thread ... Ha what a joke I mean its comical at this point , I will be dead and buried along time before things around here change drastically I will have my 6 year old son read this thread at 25 and laugh like little school kids together , and as far as the licenses when I have to get one I get it I haven't lost a day of work yet because of it.. Oh and for whom this concerns I will tip a 40 to ya on your headstone when your pipedream comes to frutition because you'll probably be gone lol



I can see it though, all the nerds that can't even run a chainsaw will go and become "Certified Tree Risk Assessor's", then when they have the market cornered, they'll come looking to hire real treemen that can actually the work. No thanks, I'll be cleaning my paint brushes. lmao.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

tree MDS said:


> I can see it though, all the nerds that can't even run a chainsaw will go and become "Certified Tree Risk Assessor's", then when they have the market cornered, they'll come looking to hire real treemen that can actually the work. No thanks, I'll be cleaning my paint brushes. lmao.


 
Well ya know there will be asspressing expos and asspressing course refreshers and they will sit around sipping tea with there pinkies out laughing about how well they are doing , I wonder if there will residentual house ivy removal asspressors ... Because if so there is a certain somebody ^ that will be the guest professor ....I guess I will just start my retirement a bit sooner and I will head on DOWN to WALTART and fill out the GREETERS application so I can scare all the children coming in at christmas time....


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 23, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


> Well ya know there will be asspressing expos and asspressing course refreshers and they will sit around sipping tea with there pinkies out laughing about how well they are doing , I wonder if there will residentual house ivy removal asspressors ... Because if so there is a certain somebody ^ that will be the guest professor ....I guess I will just start my retirement a bit sooner and I will head on DOWN to WALTART and fill out the GREETERS application so I can scare all the children coming in at christmas time....



Seriously though, this is gonna be a great boon for many a pansified test loving nerd. It sounds like a great way for them to get a leg up finally! I mean forget about the chainsaws and equipment, just bring your stack of credentials and talk the tree to death! lol.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

tree MDS said:


> Seriously though, this is gonna be a great boon for many a pansified test loving nerd. It sounds like a great way for them to get a leg up finally! I mean forget about the chainsaws and equipment, just bring your stack of credentials and talk the tree to death! lol.


 Believe me there is little to worry about there are few people with the means to indemnify themselves to a tree , it will be much more of the same .. I will not allow a business owner or a competitor to ever dictate how I earn a living so I worry about this very little .. lets put it this way they will be the ones painting equipment not me or there words will carry little weight


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 23, 2011)

I think everybody should have a copy of Matheny & Clark's "Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas", and Hayes "Evaluating Tree Defects". I like both.

For those that believe that becoming a Certified Tree Risk Assessor is a good thing; all the more to you. In some areas, it might give your company a competitive marketing advantage (unique selling proposition). Buy a resistograph while you're at it. Have fun. 

For me, not. I've played this crtification/education game for awhile now.........past "tickets" have included ISA CA (ON-459A), former NAA member, former ISA member (#19776), former Dip in Agr graduate, former Dip in Heavy Equip Tech, college diploma -2year paramedic program, current AEMCA 2009-13145 etc, etc, etc.

Education ain't a bad thing; just sometimes expensive & very time consuming. I'm planning on getting ISA CA certification again after a lapse of 5 years. 

Gotta go clean my paint roller now.


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 23, 2011)

well I can see the d-bags have dumbed up this thread and they always say the same old thing. Blah! Blah! Blah! Yeah we get your point now go away.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

Well ya know tree work is much like building the atom bomb , very complex delicate HIGHLY EDUCATED work here so only a few are truly qualified to do it , Its like a calling a "trashman" a waste management professional , you can think of as many cool and trendy names as your mind can create your still just a treeman a step above a lawn man so what...


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

Don't worry "MDS" I pretty sure that he was just referring to me with the "DUMB DUMB" comment don't get your panties all up in a bunch LOL .....


----------



## treevet (Oct 23, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


> Well ya know tree work is much like building the atom bomb , very complex delicate HIGHLY EDUCATED work here so only a few are truly qualified to do it , Its like a calling a "trashman" a waste management professional , you can think of as many cool and trendy names as your mind can create your still just a treeman a step above a lawn man so what...


 
Man.....you'd think I'da pisced in you'se guy's Wheaties or somethin. Didn't mean to set you both off in such a tizzy. I know you guyz can figger what tree should come down.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 23, 2011)

NCTREE said:


> well I can see the d-bags have dumbed up this thread and they always say the same old thing. Blah! Blah! Blah! Yeah we get your point now go away.


 
I think you're gonna do well in this business. The best salesmen don't even realize how full of crap they are.

Look how well vet has done for himself.


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 23, 2011)

Mike Cantolina said:


> I wanted to ask you guys who have studied for or taken the exam if any of the material covered trees uprooting on hill/creek sides?
> 
> I've already agreed on removing x amount of trees here because they've had two trees uproot and hit buildings. How would a Certified Tree Risk Assessor approach a job like this?


 
I would try to find out what kind of uproot is ocurring "hinged" or "shifted," that might give you a place to start. 

I'm didn't take the class or the test but I have read some of the study guide.


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 23, 2011)

"D-bag"? 

Sorry to cause offense, Lord Muck.


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 23, 2011)

Hey buddy I didn't come here for a soap opera so if you have some knowledge to share on this subject from all your self proclaimed certs and shigo readings then please do so, otherwise it all BS to me.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 23, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


> Well ya know tree work is much like building the atom bomb , very complex delicate HIGHLY EDUCATED work here so only a few are truly qualified to do it , Its like a calling a "trashman" a waste management professional , you can think of as many cool and trendy names as your mind can create your still just a treeman a step above a lawn man so what...


 
No way man. Treeman is many steps above lawn jockey, some of us just haven't reached the official Arborist plateau yet. I still retain hope for myself one day though!


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 23, 2011)

r


NCTREE said:


> Hey buddy I didn't come here for a soap opera so if you have some knowledge to share on this subject from all your self proclaimed certs and shigo readings then please do so, otherwise it all BS to me.


 

Hey buddy, where you have added ANY knowledge on this subject yourself.
"Hinged" or "Shifted" my azz, you little hick.


----------



## lxt (Oct 23, 2011)

treevet said:


> I cannot hardly contain the pleasure in saying what you 2 guys say about this program/system/accredation amounts to zero point shat. You 2 are the purest form of example of the losers this change in arboricultural history will affect. Couldn't find a better example on AS.
> 
> This is happening as we speak, no denying, debating or challenging it. You 2 cannot even take the program as you have to be a CA to take it and you have to have knowledge beyond that to pass it. Good luck in future change in careers. :msp_thumbsup: Wish the best for ya. Painting might be a good option lol.


 
Well Vet...........I am a CA & have many other certs/Licenses to add to my dosea of tree work!.......first off the cert we are speaking of is absolutely a money making bag of crap! Treeseer would save a corpse, put lipstick on it & say look "mission accomplished" & much like Bush........he along with others are caught with their heads in the crease of a Cert givers azz.

The fact people would even consider this as a certification is laughable!! I could see as a CEU or a domain in future CA testing? But a stand alone Cert..............NO! there is a point of ridiculous & a point where Licensing, skills & continuing education should make up the field & I prefer the latter, I have seen people waste their money on certs only to be layed off while others with nothing remain......Now another cert with promise of big money career choices....LOL

Tree risk Assessor........look at the base word in there will ya!



LXT...............


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 23, 2011)

treevet said:


> Man.....you'd think I'da pisced in you'se guy's Wheaties or somethin. Didn't mean to set you both off in such a tizzy. I know you guyz can figger what tree should come down.


 
I am not upset , you know that I got mad crazy stupid love for your ol' wrinkly azz , I am all for the new LTE testing here in joisey and will be studying my fat azz off to make ya proud .... I just hope your here to see the pics of me ....


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 23, 2011)

Lol. This really is a tough crowd. At least we try and keep it real though!


----------



## treemandan (Oct 23, 2011)

Mike Cantolina said:


> I wanted to ask you guys who have studied for or taken the exam if any of the material covered trees uprooting on hill/creek sides?
> 
> I've already agreed on removing x amount of trees here because they've had two trees uproot and hit buildings. How would a Certified Tree Risk Assessor approach a job like this?




To me it just seems like what goes up must come down, this risk assement course deals very spefically in timing.


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 23, 2011)

Is the assessor able to predict when a tree is going to fail? 
Sounds like a black art. Timing is everything, lol.

How about some common sense here.
Abate the hazard by removing the suspect trees, or stay awake at night worrying everytime you get lots of rain and high winds.
The leaning trees are going to eventually come down either due to root/ground/shear failures.
You remove X, Y, Z trees and decide to leave T, U, & V. What happens to that client/contractor relationship when V uproots and hits a building?


----------



## superjunior (Oct 23, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> Is the assessor able to predict when a tree is going to fail?
> Sounds like a black art. Timing is everything, lol.
> 
> How about some common sense here.
> ...


 
that's what I was thinking, seams pretty obvious from the pics


----------



## Shaun Bowler (Oct 23, 2011)

I feel that being a Certified Arborist has become equal to a Certified Crossing Guard.
When we took the CA test was'nt all this stuff covered?
I am a CTW as well.
If the ISA, or our industry, wants to raise the bar on "Professionalism" then all tree care "Certified" should be Certified Tree Workers First


----------



## treeseer (Oct 23, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> How about some common sense here.
> Abate the hazard by removing the suspect trees, or stay awake at night worrying everytime you get lots of rain and high winds.



This kind of fearmongering statement is very common, but unfortunately lacks sense, because it lacks other abatement options, like pruning, guying, root invigoration, etc. Try this work; you'll like it. :msp_thumbup: The OP trees are newly "edge" trees because the land was cleared before the house was built; now the occupants blame the trees for the problems. They are idiots, but arborists have no such excuses. Tree guys would know better with a little education. 10-20% reduced from those sprawling leaders would reduce risk significantly. Why wasn't pruning in the conversation, Mike? 

Also, the statements above about the folks who wrote and administer that course being lazy asses who don't know tree work is also nonsense. I know the guy who wrote the course well, and most of the present instructors (no creases thanks :eek2, and they ALL were doing physical work like takedowns when some of these AS sack-swingers were still in diapers. We may be older now, and making as much per hour consulting as a full crew breaking their backs, and machines, but don't be hating us for that--Join us! I have never seen a market where a well-trained arborist could not make a good living focusing on consulting arboriculture, instead of removalism. an example fyi:

This Quercus phellos measured 113 inches in circumference at breast height and is a significant risk. Visual inspection of the lower trunk on the sidewalk side of the tree revealed a large, relatively fresh, vertical crack.

At the top of this crack is a black growth resembling a fungal fruiting body. Coupled with the hollow soundings produced 360° by our rubber hammer, this indicates the progression of interior decay towards the bark. The crack suggests the tree is not walling off decay well and that there may not be enough of a reliable shell of wood near the crack to support the tree in an extreme weather event. We also noted fungal infections adjacent to pruning wounds in the canopy, which also indicates the spread of decay. The pruning wounds do not appear to be closing.

View attachment 204171


Seven reasons we needed not climb the tree to inspect this area, left to right:
1. Large branch over the road, visibly decayed back to a node near the trunk. This area has a concentration of chemicals and structures that make it a branch/bud protection zone. It is also “hot spot”, in the Zone of Rapid Taper. Considering the Town’s short pruning cycle of 1-2 years, the size of the branch and the extent of decay are significant.
2.	Apparent saprophytic fungus (which grows on tissue that is already dead), perhaps Stereum sp., is spreading towards a similar “hot spot” node on a branch facing west. 
3.	Recent pruning wound being attacked by this fungus.
4.	Nearby pruning wound not closing.
5.	The most recent pruning wound is also not closing.
6.	Apparent parasitic fungus (which grows in living wood), resembling Polyporus, grows on included bark between this wound and the largest branch/leader in this midstem area
7.	Upward-pointing structure above the fungus advancing up this leader might be loose bark affected by decay.


Fig 1.1 Roots girdling and scarred. East view. Fig. 1-2 Girdling root disrupts circulation. north view

If only one or two of these signs of disease or symptoms of tree response to disease were evident, closer inspection and precise identification of pathogens may be warranted. In total, they point to interior decay and poor condition, beyond any mitigation. Removal should be strongly considered. The sooner the tree is removed, the quicker a replacement tree can be installed and begin establishing its roots.

MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
The other trees with visible fungal fruiting bodies or audible hollows noted should be assessed with a noninvasive decay-detection instrument such as a tomograph. The extent of decay will indicate potential mitigation, such as how much and where they should be pruned, for health and safety. Vines and other growth should be kept clear of the stems of all the trees to permit inspection. Mulch should be spread near—not on—the trunks, to prevent further damage by and to lawnmowers.

The primary problem these trees have is root damage during work on curbs and sidewalks. The upcoming final report will include appendices describing ways of maintaining safe walking surfaces and adequate water direction while minimizing impacts to the trees. For now we recommend the City of cease any further pavement works adjacent to significant trees until City staff, including Streets and Grounds, is familiar with all reasonable options for these works, and with relevant industry standards and references.

This concludes our preliminary report. We can clarify any portions of it upon request.

Sincerely Yours,

ISA Board-Certified Master Arborist #xx-0284 
Certified Municipal and Utility Arborist and Climbing Specialist


----------



## Mike Cantolina (Oct 23, 2011)

Actually, this particular owner is very reluctant to remove trees. Pruning will be discussed after removals. I recommended 11 removals which 4 were already done before I took the pics. That leaves seven more to do. Yes, I based this decision on experience and common sense. I'm always anxious for more knowledge though.


----------



## Mike Cantolina (Oct 24, 2011)

I'm mistaken, 5 were already done leaving 6 more to do.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 24, 2011)

Mike Cantolina said:


> Actually, this particular owner is very reluctant to remove trees. Pruning will be discussed after removals.


Why wait? Owners needed to know about pruning options before getting removal quote. The ones left look like 1 day's worth of pruning, 2 men, pack the brush on the slope to slow erosion and improve root stability. No chipper required. 

The removal approach increases erosion and lessens stability of the remaining trees. If there's no climber or aerial lift access or the pole tools to make those cuts, find a sub, or buy 'em.

Del, directional pruning has been done for decades; the trees can grow larger AND more stable; 3-5 year cycle, forever. Owner keeps a growing asset, you have steady work. Of course if felling every 30-40 years is what you and the owner want, fine. You don't need to be as logical a scientist as John Galt to figure that one out. Eddie Withers would know it right away. 
View attachment 204186


The growth habits of individual tree species within the local environment were considered in order to develop the following pruning specifications.

"Pruning shall be done in accordance with ANSI A300 (Part 1) Pruning." Work procedures will follow the requirements (indicated by the word "shall") and recommendations (indicated by the word "should") of the ANSI A300 Part 1 Pruning standards. Note: On occasion, the arborist is allowed to deviate from a recommendation based on the unique needs of a particular job, tree species, or work site.


1. Tree(s) to be pruned: ______________________________________________________________

2. State Pruning Objective(s). 
Risk reduction, increase stability and lessen risk of uprooting _____________________________________________________________________
Manage Health, explain: _____________________________________________________________________
Clearance, explain___________________________________________________________________________
Structural Improvement/correction, explain:_____Edge trees—restore symmetry_________________
View improvement, explain:___________________________________________________________________
Aesthetic improvement, explain________________________________________________________________
Restoration, explain: Restore stability lost when adjacent trees were removed to clear room for house_______
Structural, explain___________________________________________________________________________
Other, explain______________________________________________________________________________

3. Select Pruning Method(s) and Create Specification(s) to accomplish the objective(s). (Italicized fields are required.)
Clean (Pruning to remove one or more of the following non-beneficial parts: dead, diseased, and/or broken branches).
Location: _________________________
Size range of parts to be removed: ____1” and above______________
Other: _________________________
Raise (Selective pruning to provide vertical clearance).
Clearance distance:_________________________
Location: _________________________
Size range of parts to be removed: _________________________
Other: _________________________ 
Reduce (Selective pruning to decrease height and/or spread).
Location/Clearance: Branches sprawling toward building-<20% off, -_______________________
Size range of parts to be removed: 1-3” cuts; up to 15’ off_________________________
Other: _________________________
Thin (Selective pruning to reduce density of live branches).
Location: _________________________
Percentage of foliage to be removed: _________________________
Other: _________________________

4. Specialty Pruning
Restoration (Selective pruning to redevelop structure, form, and appearance of severely pruned, vandalized, or damaged trees.)
Size range of parts to be removed: _________________________
Location: _________________________
Percentage of sprouts to be removed: _________________________
Other: _________________________

Vista/View (Pruning shall consist of the use of one or more pruning methods(types) to enhance a specific line of sight.)
Pruning Methods(s) to be used: _________________________
Size range of parts to be removed: _________________________
Location: _________________________
Percentage of foliage to be removed: _________________________
Other: _________________________

SAMPLE PRUNING SPECIFICATIONS

#1.	Scope:

Objective:	•	Leaning trees on hillside

Enhance structural stability and symmetry; minimize lean, decay, weak attachments, and heavy ends.

Specifications:	General: All pruning shall be completed in compliance with A300 and Z133.1 Standards. 
Detail: Remove all dead branches >1”. 
Reduce all overextended branches back to a favorable lateral, or to the origin. Reduce rubbing or decayed or cracked branches to restore symmetry and maximize collection of sunlight. 

No more than 20% removed from each tree with 1-3” cuts


Cmon guys this is basic stuff.


----------



## mattfr12 (Oct 24, 2011)

I really like that idea tresser and have tried to sell it myself a few times i just wish the general public had an appreciation for trees like i do or most other people on this site they usualy want them just cut down and its hard to talk them out of it. sometimes if you keep pressing them they just give the job to someone else.

example i got a call to remove a 70 foot red oak i mean this tree was beautiful no rot to be seen perfectly straight. but they wanted it out. i tried selling reduction like that tried pushing cableing on them. explained to them what it takes to get a tree like that. but in the end they said they dont wanna rake the leaves or what them on thier new roof. so we ended up doing it i mean this tree was so healthy and stout well over 60" at the base. i finally got to use my 3/4 inch rope and the hobbs device it would take one hell of a shock load.

i agree with you on the idea ive been in buisness long enough where im finally getting paid again to work on the same trees some on thier 2nd and 3rd time.


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 24, 2011)

If what the majority of you are saying that "what goes up must come down" and "the tree will eventually come down so why not take it down now" then anyone could be an arborist including johnyonenut working at the turd factory. It takes alot of expertise to come to that conclusion. 

I get reall bored with the same old #### of the everyday removal grind, it's like working in a factory same #### different day. I need to learn new things in order to keep myself from going insane. This a subject I find interesting and want to learn more about. I'm sick of hearing the broken record some of you guys spew out your trap door just because your stuck where your at and refuse to better yourself doesn't mean everyone else feels the same way. Go take your negative crap somewhere else you miserable SOB. 

Oh yeah and polerus I'll take "hick" as a compliment coming from your mouth Mr Ontario! Blah Ha Ha Ha!


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 24, 2011)

"This kind of fearmongering statement is very common, but unfortunately lacks sense, because it lacks other abatement options, like pruning, guying, root invigoration, etc."

The rationale used by some municipalities to NOT brace and cable trees is that doing same acknowledges the tree poses a hazard in the first place, or such work would not be unnecessary. The cabled tree subsequently fails, and then what? Are you telling me that getting caught up in a litigation battle is worth this hassle?

More common sense is involved here than fearmongering.

I'd like to hear more about root invigoration. Seems that invigorating a leaning edge tree on the side of a creek might not be such a great idea, imo. How much is guying/pruning gonna cost as opposed to removals? There is not just one magnificent heritage specimen tree that is being discussed in this particular situation.

If these abatement options are done, I have to imagine an explicit disclaimer will be attached to the contract not holding the arborist responsible if and when the tree fails at some point in the future.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 24, 2011)

"The rationale used by some municipalities to NOT brace and cable trees is that doing same acknowledges the tree poses a hazard in the first place, or such work would not be unnecessary. The cabled tree subsequently fails, and then what?" ever been to daytona beach?

attached.View attachment 204200


" How much is guying/pruning gonna cost as opposed to removals?"

One day 2 men, as noted. no guying on this needed imo, tho it would buy extra insurance for the really scared client.

"There is not just one magnificent heritage specimen tree that is being discussed in this particular situation."

No,, but there are many in the making, if arborists train them.

"If these abatement options are done, I have to imagine an explicit disclaimer will be attached to the contract not holding the arborist responsible if and when the tree fails at some point in the future"

A variation of this goes on most contracts. note #10:
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS

1.	Any legal description provided to the consultant/appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management.

2.	It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other governmental regulations.

3.	Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/appraiser can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.

4.	The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement.

5.	Loss or alteration of any part of this part of this report invalidates the entire report.

6.	Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior express written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser.

7.	Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser -- particularly as to value conclusions, identity of the consultant/appraiser, or any reference to any professional society or institute or to any initialed designation conferred upon the consultant/appraiser as stated in his qualifications.

8.	This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant's/ appraiser's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

9.	Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys.

10.	Unless expressed otherwise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future. 

this is basic arbo; DO IT NOW!


----------



## treemandan (Oct 24, 2011)

When all is said and done there is a whole lot more said than done.


I am sure there is something to be gotten from this assement course. It may be like that project mananger course I took where I thought we were back in first grade with the elementary stuff they were talking about. To be certified? 

In a situation like Mike C posted its easy to get what Mr. Corbin what saying. Sure, options are present in most situations, they should be discussed.

Fear mongering is something so easy to do one may not realize he just did it. Sometime its little far fetched: one time I said " Well this one missed ya, it kinda looks like the next one will kill you in yer sleep." It was a possibility.

And sometime I look at a thing and immediatly the only way I want to handle it is to chop it the #### down just to get to end whatever debates that would confuse the situation.


SAV A TREE?


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 24, 2011)

treemandan said:


> When all is said and done there is a whole lot more said than done.


 
Amen!

On the other hand, locking clients into expensive 3-5 year mandatory maintenance schedules sounds like a profitable gig. Putting trees on artificial life support can be both fun AND profitable.

Keep pumping fertilizer into the ground or else you know what is going to happen to those trees......
Anyone advocating facelifts and botox injections for 90 year old grandmothers to keep them looking vibrant and youthful?


----------



## lxt (Oct 24, 2011)

Anything to defend a Cert because someone already has it & wants it to become a requirement :msp_scared: In regards to Treeseer & his ongoing pruning, guying, cabling save em at all cost attitude........Ill say this......when any hazard presents itself that can cause injury or fatality to human life..........then that hazard must be removed!!!

The pics mike has posted show trees which are not an immeditae hazard......But, due to the growth habit present (phototropism), hillside erosion, wind & the continued maintenance to keep them on the hill instead of the house....I say removal now is cheaper.....this is were Treeseer & others sharing the absurd save em attitude dont get it......these trees will grow, they will grow toward & over the house, they will be subject to snow load, etc... at this point "mitigation" costs will soar through the roof...probably after the trees do!

I think another problem is that some people (treeseer) think everyone owns an estate or the trees are in an historical setting & theres money just given from wall street to care for the hazard dying trees around the world!!! Not!!!, I consulted with Pa DCNR years ago & suggested to remove numerous trees (overcrowding, dying, uproots, etc..) they hire a consulting Arborist to trump my suggestion..............spent lots of money on his laughable report.....not even 1 year later guess what? Yep...they call me back cause trees are falling like locusts in a biblical plague...........I told them to have the consulting Arborist there with his report so he could get properly educated in what nature can do & that not everything the book says is true!

Well................He didnt show, wonder why? they spent almost $1000.00 to have this idiot inspect & write out a report, he used fancy terms & cited paragraphs & writings by the fields top gurus..........well his BS sold the powers that be..THEN! forward to NOW.....I handle all the Parks tree issues......guess that common sense thing actually works!!




LXT.................


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 24, 2011)

NCTREE said:


> If what the majority of you are saying that "what goes up must come down" and "the tree will eventually come down so why not take it down now" then anyone could be an arborist including johnyonenut working at the turd factory. It takes alot of expertise to come to that conclusion.
> 
> I get reall bored with the same old #### of the everyday removal grind, it's like working in a factory same #### different day. I need to learn new things in order to keep myself from going insane. This a subject I find interesting and want to learn more about. I'm sick of hearing the broken record some of you guys spew out your trap door just because your stuck where your at and refuse to better yourself doesn't mean everyone else feels the same way. Go take your negative crap somewhere else you miserable SOB.
> 
> Oh yeah and polerus I'll take "hick" as a compliment coming from your mouth Mr Ontario! Blah Ha Ha Ha!





The removal of edge trees beside a creek leaning towards a structure should be a no-brainer, hick, and you ARE correct; it does not take a lot of expertise to come to that conclusion. Just a modicum of common sense.
Glad we could agree about something.


----------



## FanOFatherNash (Oct 24, 2011)

View attachment 204252


closer and closer every election


----------



## troythetreeman (Oct 24, 2011)

if tree risk assessment is some real and valid "science" and not simply common sense gained from years of experience, something the new guy needs, then make it part of existing certifications
the idea that you can take and pass a test, but then that test is somehow invalid without continued upkeep of fees is asinine
to retest every so many years, not so much
and any certification is moot if its not held by the guy actually in the tree


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 24, 2011)

treemandan said:


> When all is said and done there is a whole lot more said than done.
> 
> 
> I am sure there is something to be gotten from this assement course. It may be like that project mananger course I took where I thought we were back in first grade with the elementary stuff they were talking about. To be certified?
> ...


 
I'm done with that dude

Yeah I think from the pictures Treeco has the best option, I was even thinking of thinning out the woodlot all together to make the stand more of an even aged stand that way the smaller trees have a better chance.

I agree that some situations are pretty simple to come to a conclusion but thats not always the case, we have all taken down a tree or two that looked way worse than it really was and if we would have weighed all the options and examined all the the evidence we would have done things differently unless thats what you like to do. I think that having this cert could for 1. make you more money and 2. hold up in court if it was ever a situation where it was the certs word against the adverage tree guys' word and I don't mean adverage in a bad way.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 24, 2011)

NCTREE said:


> well I can see the d-bags have dumbed up this thread and they always say the same old thing. Blah! Blah! Blah! Yeah we get your point now go away.



If it bothers you that much maybe you could try your luck over at the buzz. I'm sure them dudes would be happy to toss your salad for ya. Just saying.


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 24, 2011)

tree MDS said:


> If it bothers you that much maybe you could try your luck over at the buzz. I'm sure them dudes would be happy to toss your salad for ya. Just saying.


 
Maybe I already am over there as far as tossing salads well I never was much for rabbit food. 

How old are you MDS? I could of swore you were an oldtimer but from the way you act and talk I can see the years of abusing alcohol impeded your train of tought. Thats ok I understand your living with some deep traumatic experience I hope it all works out for you. I'll still buy ya a beer


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 24, 2011)

NCTREE said:


> Maybe I already am over there as far as tossing salads well I never was much for rabbit food.
> 
> How old are you MDS? I could of swore you were an oldtimer but from the way you act and talk I can see the years of abusing alcohol impeded your train of tought. Thats ok I understand your living with some deep traumatic experience I hope it all works out for you. I'll still buy ya a beer


 
Yeah I know, I tried to hold back.. it was just the statement I quoted bothered me. that and your new sig makes me wanna sock it in the side of the head. It's all good though, I'll still take the beer! lol.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 24, 2011)

[/QUOTE]

MDS Did ya look at that website its looks like a dog and pony show , SHHH laugh quietly ..... And to stay bad things to you..... the nerve ...


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 24, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


>


 
MDS Did ya look at that website its looks like a dog and pony show , SHHH laugh quietly ..... And to stay bad things to you..... the nerve ...[/QUOTE]

What was that Lard Fingers? I can't hear you when you whisper like that! Lol.


----------



## treevet (Oct 24, 2011)

Huge amounts of hot wind being spewed here. Been too busy to indulge for a couple of days but noted the leaves trembling on my trees and the prevailing wind as usual was from the direction of Arboristsite. Gads of pontificating, grand standing (LXT(eet) didn't yo daddy AA run ya off with threats of a lawsuit few weeks ago? We all saw it.....humiliating....ouch....left your manhood in question) and blustering (who is this new fool Peonis?).

Anyhoo, so as not to join the long "passing air" club I will make my point....

Don't mean poo what you fools thank bout this new cert. Like the 2 gentlemen I met from the huge metropolis of Atlanta , Georgia said, " you will NOT remove as much as a sapling as big as my middle finger that is pointed at you, even in your very back yard on private property without a permit from (guess what) the city's Certified ISA Tree Risk assessor" THE REAL TREE RISK ASSESSOR OF THE UNIVERSE.......this will come to all of you in drips and drabs.....count on it. Just the same as city's have taken to excluding anyone without the much maligned CA to even as much as trim an adventitious shoot of a tree on private property soon. Laws are being run past city councils and then being enforced and adjucated as I type.

This new Cert. as stated has been developed and administered by the PNW Chapter of the ISA and will shortly be taken over by the ISA at large. Those with current cert. will be transferred in. They, and others will have to take specialty specific ceu's and at the end of 4 years be required to re take the course (without the test if current) which will be....

drastically different and evolved from scientific input. Could go into it much more but the audience here renders the effort a waste of calories expended.

In summary: The credential is already existent....is gonna be around til way after the cows come home...and will make obsolete the self important, delusional self proclaimed expert with the knowledge of the years of mankind in his little pea brain to draw from. Good luck to ya. Maybe the real experts will hire you for some of the lower level stuff outside of assessment and mitigation like maybe knocking down a no brainer or two if you lick their butts.:hmm3grin2orange:

Please continue wasting your time complaining about something that already exists and cannot possibly be changed esp. by a bunch intellectually challenged, lazy hayseeds.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 24, 2011)

You couldn't even legally prune a ##### Willow (lol) in my state with your credentials old guy. Just saying.


----------



## treevet (Oct 24, 2011)

tree MDS said:


> You couldn't even legally prune a ##### Willow (lol) in my state with your credentials old guy. Just saying.


 
would that state be....intoxicated? :kilt:

you're probably right lol


----------



## lxt (Oct 24, 2011)

treeseer said:


> That point of view is exactly why this training is needed. :taped:
> 
> The course also mentions MITIGATION; work like pruning those edge trees to improve stability. This work may take more skill, but it does preserve the asset for the owner, so it is worth considering.
> 
> There's one born every minute. :jester:


 
Funny thing is..........years ago you were to paint your cuts, drop crotch to create roundovers & so on........directional pruning on a hillside uhh? yeah....good luck with that!!! I know first hand how that works for the utility, The point....what was once common place has evolved to where we are now, Hmmm....gotta wonder what will will be the future thought on trees on a hillside overcrowned toward a building............will it be to directional prune?

I remember reading that trees grow as a community & someone already made the statement that the house was built while the trees were there..........I also remember reading that when that community is disrupted it is all to common for failures to occur....Cmon this is basic stuff!! funny how its basic but certain people wanna put a spin on things to make it seem complicated so they can profit from it................Now thats just Greed!


LXT.............


----------



## lxt (Oct 24, 2011)

treevet said:


> Huge amounts of hot wind being spewed here. Been too busy to indulge for a couple of days but noted the leaves trembling on my trees and the prevailing wind as usual was from the direction of Arboristsite. Gads of pontificating, grand standing (LXT(eet) didn't yo daddy AA run ya off with threats of a lawsuit few weeks ago? We all saw it.....humiliating....ouch....left your manhood in question) and blustering (who is this new fool Peonis?).
> 
> Anyhoo, so as not to join the long "passing air" club I will make my point....
> 
> ...


 
1st off grandpa I think your metamucil quit working! you are backed up with so much bowel that your son AA needs to come over with the spoon to dig out the impact!

I put AA in his lying place & you notice who is on top of the mountain now.....!!!! Your point!!!! your point is as impotent as you are, you`re from Ohio sprout...! Ive worked there for the utility & been to council meetings, board meetings, etc... & aint no dam tree asspressor cert being talked about...............

The only scientific explanation I would like is how some bath water drinking fool cruisin on his hover round is even still visiting this site............you got run off here like I sent AA & his lawn mower packing, you are even worse than AA...........atleast he still has the guts to stick with it.............you, much like a spanked school girl left crying & whining, I got something for you to assess & it aint no tree "Larry".............your glorified Cert. is a pipe dream............much like you being able to cast your seed from your non working manhood!



LXT................


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 24, 2011)

treevet said:


> would that state be....intoxicated? :kilt:
> 
> you're probably right lol


 
Lol. Hey, I think it's a good thing that you got this credential. Now, at least you can legitamately claim you that you finally know what you're doing after all these years! Better late than never IMO. It is a shame they didn't come up with this credential sooner! just think of all those poor trees you could have saved in your 400+ years here on earth! lol.

Edit: Nice skirt BTW. good to see you rebounded from that incident out behind the bar, and are now back out on the town! lol.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 24, 2011)

treevet said:


> Huge amounts of hot wind being spewed here. Been too busy to indulge for a couple of days but noted the leaves trembling on my trees and the prevailing wind as usual was from the direction of Arboristsite. Gads of pontificating, grand standing (LXT(eet) didn't yo daddy AA run ya off with threats of a lawsuit few weeks ago? We all saw it.....humiliating....ouch....left your manhood in question) and blustering (who is this new fool Peonis?).
> 
> Anyhoo, so as not to join the long "passing air" club I will make my point....
> 
> ...


 
Would you hire him ? If ya did you would have to hire a $8 an hr. guy to drive him from job to job LOL ... A 2fer deal ya know .Kinda like sheriff in the FUNNY FARM ...


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 24, 2011)

lxt said:


> 1st off grandpa I think your metamucil quit working! you are backed up with so much bowel that your son AA needs to come over with the spoon to dig out the impact!
> 
> I put AA in his lying place & you notice who is on top of the mountain now.....!!!! Your point!!!! your point is as impotent as you are, you`re from Ohio sprout...! Ive worked there for the utility & been to council meetings, board meetings, etc... & aint no dam tree asspressor cert being talked about...............
> 
> ...


 
The line is growing when it comes to quivering little ####### here 1st was OD and then TV and from time to time AA , and countless others who can't stand the truth ... Not me I know exactly how big of a fat loser I am one step away from the meth clinic and lucky to not be in jail yet ...


----------



## jefflovstrom (Oct 24, 2011)

I just figured out why people lurk,,,,,,,, cause this is good. That is why.
Jeff


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 24, 2011)

tree MDS said:


> Yeah I know, I tried to hold back.. it was just the statement I quoted bothered me. that and your new sig makes me wanna sock it in the side of the head. It's all good though, I'll still take the beer! lol.


 
Sorry to hurt your feelings Mds didn't realize you were so sensitive... douchebag! Don't worry i'll have that cert soon but i'll look out for ya Mds you can have my table scraps


----------



## treeseer (Oct 24, 2011)

"I just figured out why people lurk,,,,,,,, cause this is good. That is why."

Things that slow in San diego? :biggrin: 

The knuckles are plowing down to the hardpan...:notrolls2:


----------



## mattfr12 (Oct 24, 2011)

NCTREE said:


> Sorry to hurt your feelings Mds didn't realize you were so sensitive... douchebag! Don't worry i'll have that cert soon but i'll look out for ya Mds you can have my table scraps



In all seriousness are you saying that guys with this certification opionons are gonna be the only ones that matter and get work. because the CA thing hasnt done much for me and i live in pa also. Almost 100% of the time people dont know what the ISA is and the tree work is awarded to the lowest bidder. I have CA on staff for the municipal work that we do but in that sense it also wasnt mandatory for us to have. I cant say that i have seen a profit gain from it. sure its good to have the knowledge and i would also consider doing this but if its like the CA think i wouldnt expect to get rich off of it. We get to buy the fancy toys by taking down big trees. and 9 times out of ten the HO already has thier mind made up.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 24, 2011)

NCTREE said:


> Sorry to hurt your feelings Mds didn't realize you were so sensitive... douchebag! Don't worry i'll have that cert soon but i'll look out for ya Mds you can have my table scraps


 
Thanks. I'm just not a huge fan of Milktoast and Granola. I do appreciate the offer though!


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 24, 2011)

mattfr12 said:


> In all seriousness are you saying that guys with this certification opionons are gonna be the only ones that matter and get work. because the CA thing hasnt done much for me and i live in pa also. Almost 100% of the time people dont know what the ISA is and the tree work is awarded to the lowest bidder. I have CA on staff for the municipal work that we do but in that sense it also wasnt mandatory for us to have. I cant say that i have seen a profit gain from it. sure its good to have the knowledge and i would also consider doing this but if its like the CA think i wouldnt expect to get rich off of it. We get to buy the fancy toys by taking down big trees. and 9 times out of ten the HO already has thier mind made up.


 
No and maybe, i'm not looking to make a killing off of this cert and I probably won't either, I think it's a good cert to have maybe better then the CA. The CA is a little to general at least it was when I took it, this cert goes much deeper and from talking to others the test is hard. It will definatly come in handy in lots of situations.


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 24, 2011)

NCTREE said:


> No and maybe, i'm not looking to make a killing off of this cert and I probably won't either, I think it's a good cert to have maybe better then the CA. The CA is a little to general at least it was when I took it, this cert goes much deeper and from talking to others the test is hard. It will definatly come in handy in lots of situations.



Hey, anything to get a leg up! Lol.


----------



## mr. holden wood (Oct 24, 2011)

mattfr12 said:


> In all seriousness are you saying that guys with this certification opionons are gonna be the only ones that matter and get work. because the CA thing hasnt done much for me and i live in pa also. Almost 100% of the time people dont know what the ISA is and the tree work is awarded to the lowest bidder. I have CA on staff for the municipal work that we do but in that sense it also wasnt mandatory for us to have. I cant say that i have seen a profit gain from it. sure its good to have the knowledge and i would also consider doing this but if its like the CA think i wouldnt expect to get rich off of it. We get to buy the fancy toys by taking down big trees. and 9 times out of ten the HO already has thier mind made up.


 
Were running out of big trees here, imo its why cities are mandating the cert on trees over 30" dbh. Seattle has lost over half its tree canopy in the past 30 years. Lots that have houses that use to cover a quarter of the property are being torn down and replaced by townhomes. Huge firs are replaced with styrax's. 
This cert is geared more toward slowing removals of large trees in cities. I don't think it's going to affect rural areas for now. A yard in PA has more mature trees then a block in Seattle. If it wasn't for certs/permits we would have nothing left to hunt, our houses would burn up when you turned the lights on and clearcuts would never be replanted. At some point this will hit the smaller towns though and you guys might just have to open a book and take a test, not that big of a deal really ya might even learn something


----------



## mattfr12 (Oct 24, 2011)

mr. holden wood said:


> Were running out of big trees here, imo its why cities are mandating the cert on trees over 30" dbh. Seattle has lost over half its tree canopy in the past 30 years. Lots that have houses that use to cover a quarter of the property are being torn down and replaced by townhomes. Huge firs are replaced with styrax's.
> This cert is geared more toward slowing removals of large trees in cities. I don't think it's going to affect rural areas for now. A yard in PA has more mature trees then a block in Seattle. If it wasn't for certs/permits we would have nothing left to hunt, our houses would burn up when you turned the lights on and clearcuts would never be replanted. At some point this will hit the smaller towns though and you guys might just have to open a book and take a test, not that big of a deal really ya might even learn something


 
Ya i believe that you guys do have a depleated tree population. and in alot of areas around here it is already regulated but not by that certification. we bid on thier contracts every year the cities and municipalities have thier own CA that do all the planing on what they want done with them and it is put up for bid. Thier are a few places around here that you cant cut the street trees without a permit.


----------



## lxt (Oct 26, 2011)

mr. holden wood said:


> Were running out of big trees here, imo its why cities are mandating the cert on trees over 30" dbh. Seattle has lost over half its tree canopy in the past 30 years. Lots that have houses that use to cover a quarter of the property are being torn down and replaced by townhomes. Huge firs are replaced with styrax's.
> This cert is geared more toward slowing removals of large trees in cities. I don't think it's going to affect rural areas for now. A yard in PA has more mature trees then a block in Seattle. If it wasn't for certs/permits we would have nothing left to hunt, our houses would burn up when you turned the lights on and clearcuts would never be replanted. At some point this will hit the smaller towns though and you guys might just have to open a book and take a test, not that big of a deal really ya might even learn something


 
Well.....I understand what you are saying, BUT..... this Certification sounds like a "loop hole" around an ordinance or a regulation to me! In the situation you speak of above I agree something should be done..............But you Cert wanting guys better realize something, sooner than later what you pay money for today as a certification will be replaced by another & another Cert which will be better & better................where does it stop? why cant the CA certification cover all aspects like it use to when the NAA regulated it? ohh thats right, Very Few could pass the exam & less MONEY was made & after all its about education right :msp_w00t: 

I remember when the CA was ISA`s self proclaimed "Hallmark" of the Industry............Now look at how it is viewed! The only people making out on the Certs are the TCIA & ISA............Talk about fearmongoring......they make it sound like if you dont get these Certs you will be poor & unable to move forward in this industry!

To Tell the truth I made more money without all these stinking certifications than I do with them! I made more money back in the late 80`s, early 90`s with a pick up & some gear than I do now with all the toys, so why do I keep my Certs.............Cause unlike the greedy we need more cert types, I truly like to learn & know about trees & their enviroment!

Funny thing is.....I do more consulting now than ever, mostly for utilities & the guys on here thinking all their certs are worth something couldnt even fill a low level utility inspector position...............which by the way pays way less than being a non certified climber...............Yes Vet even in Ohio!!! so hurry up & go get that Cert!!!




LXT.......................


----------



## lxt (Oct 26, 2011)

treevet said:


> This forum is getting dumber and dumber( cause I am a member) , The convicts are taking over the jail. And they are world class dumb (just like me)
> 
> This cert gives a systemmatic (money making) routine for assessing the ones a dummy cannot id from the window. (basically we need the cert cause we are so dumb we cant tell from the window if the tree is bad & in my case I cant see at all)
> 
> 2 men were at the seminar (con artists) from Atlanta who are the Coming to your neighborhood soon. Either move with the times or get left behind in a ditch (where you likely belong). Get certed and get recognized as being a idiot on how to rate an extreme risk tree prior to making a stupid, non-intelligent, un-educated decision. Or know when to leave them alone or mitigate risks (like us) so future generations can appreciate and benefit from them.


 
Fixed it for ya!! Now it reads correctly......!

Yep....! get that Cert & then Hire me cause you dont have the ability to do the "Dangerous" tree(s) that you have ASSessed! LMFAO, what a joke!!! its like a snakeoil salesman certification!!! LOL

Can you imagine paying the plumber to come over & tell you "yep your drain is clogged, with hair & other debris" that`ll be $100.00....what? can I fix it?..............hell no Ma`am you`ll have to call in a working plumber Im just an assessing plumber..........LOL, maybe the states should take over & create a license for this trade & then we wont have to be subjected to greedy Certification givers wanting money anyway they can get it, along with listening to some old has been holding his oxygen mask on with his left hand & smoking a Cig with the other!!


LXT..............


----------



## lxt (Oct 26, 2011)

treeseer said:


> "I just figured out why people lurk,,,,,,,, cause this is good. That is why."
> 
> Things that slow in San diego? :biggrin:
> 
> The knuckles are plowing down to the hardpan...:notrolls2:


 


Yeah I didnt see your name on that list of over 700 Trace idiots!!! 


LXT.........


----------



## epicklein22 (Oct 26, 2011)

To the original OP, you really know how to stir the pot! Did you really think a legit answer would have been the result of this thread? I knew this one would be a good #### storm just by the thread title. HAHAHA 

Please don't take any offense to my post....I'm sure you weren't thinking of this when you posted the Q's.


----------



## superjunior (Oct 26, 2011)

opcorn:


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

lxt said:


> Well.....I understand what you are saying, BUT..... this Certification sounds like a "loop hole" around an ordinance or a regulation to me! In the situation you speak of above I agree something should be done..............But you Cert wanting guys better realize something, sooner than later what you pay money for today as a certification will be replaced by another & another Cert which will be better & better................where does it stop? why cant the CA certification cover all aspects like it use to when the NAA regulated it? ohh thats right, Very Few could pass the exam & less MONEY was made & after all its about education right :msp_w00t:



A loophole??? WTF that mean dipschit? "Certification sounds like a "loop hole" around an ordinance...." What? Duh!:jester:

And what Cert did the NAA regulate. You got you head uppa yo as s as usual. You are in the upper echelon of dumbest fags on this forum. You disappear for large blocks of time, then all of a sudden you are back, uggh, and blabbing bullshat everywhere. How bout making this one of those times you disappear? AA kicked your ascs big time....we all saw it....it was embarassing to watch and demeaning to mankind in general (like those "unmanly" commercials). Go run to your momma before yo daddy, AA comes on this thread and whups up on you again lol. OOOOOuw he gonna sue me  dern I wet myself again.

Uh oh ....more and more certs showing who really studied and knows anything. Tisk Tisk, I was doing so fine when people thought I knew something, now I gotta crack a book on fungi id and virulence, CODIT, shell wall thickness thresholds, root crown investigations for decay, etc etc. THEN after learning the whole system to rate a tree using all the steps, I gotta write a report and submit it for prioritization, mitigation, retention, removal and ACTUALLY be responsible for the decision. Drat, it was just so easy before. See the tree, cut the tree down, buy the twelve pack, deaden my already degraded brain, go to sleep, get up the next day and do it all over again hoping to pay the bills for my ugly wife and genetically dumb kids waiting at the door with their mouths open.

As for the big summit where experts from all over the world met to assess the woods for defects and hazard high risk trees and afterwards when they said they were ok and left they starting falling like rain.....then they summon the GURU, LXTeat, and he arrives and waves a wand and the world experts all run into hiding as he does his assessin and a little as s suckin and fartin, and the results are in the newspaper the next day and all the appropriate trade journals ....as for that....

BULLSchit. Let's hear more fairy tales from your fairy as s.:hmm3grin2orange:



> I remember when the CA was ISA`s self proclaimed "Hallmark" of the Industry............Now look at how it is viewed! The only people making out on the Certs are the TCIA & ISA............Talk about fearmongoring......they make it sound like if you dont get these Certs you will be poor & unable to move forward in this industry!



And just how do they make it "sound like" anything? They just go about their business of researching, teaching, and identifying the learned individuals that should represent us in day to day business. Without them the group of us are perceived as the hack that tops trees and grinds out a stump half way and hides the rest with grindings and spikes all over live trees and rips off senior citizens. Don't you see that? No cause all you do cut em down....shoot first and ask questions later. You are a hack.

Yes, as Holden says, this system is in part to preserve trees from the tree life thieves for profit guys like you but it also meant, like I said earlier, now listen up ####wad....to ID the trees that a dummy like you wouldn't see outta the window of your Yugo. Ever see a tree that was completely healthy in the canopy, the trunk was pristine without a flaw and all the wood that was holding it up was just thin shell of wood that is outside of Wall 4 CODIT? Picture that tree also as having dead roots as well and a solid 100 foot stem (lever arm) above it above a playground with kids out there all day every day. 

Not id'ed by a non learner like mr. Teat or anyone like him. No system, no investigation, no report.... no culpability....many deaths and injuries on a mildly windy day. It is THESE hard to notice, high risk (no target...no risk) trees...that this system and associated practicioners are certed to identify and protect people from.



> Funny thing is.....I do more consulting now than ever, mostly for utilities & the guys on here thinking all their certs are worth something couldnt even fill a low level utility inspector position...............which by the way pays way less than being a non certified climber...............Yes Vet even in Ohio!!! so hurry up & go get that Cert!!!



You as a consultant is a scary thing and....Oh, I will get that cert. Just gotta wait for the results. And, not to worry....I will make plenty of money with it. I will make money just with a pad and pencil and system and credential backed by the ISA. You can bet your tiny little weiny on that buddy.



LXT.......................[/QUOTE]


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

lxt said:


> Can you imagine me paying the plumber to come over & tell me "yep your drain is clogged, with hair & other debris" (aa's condom from our shower together) that`ll be $100.00(and that's all I made last month)....what? can I fix it?..............hell no LXTeat you`ll have to call in a working plumber Im just an as s plunger (can do somethin else for ya tho :biggrin..........
> 
> LXT..............


 
since turn around is fair play thought I'd fix your post as you really meant it to read...see above.opcorn:


----------



## sgreanbeans (Oct 27, 2011)

lol, u guys will fight over anything! I get the certs because, although I realize the cert does not make the arb, it does make you more appealing to the customer, if you are lucky enough to have a customer who cares, and that is different from place to place. There are many guys on here who don't have any certs, that have more knowledge than me, no biggie, they choose not to get it, I did. Believe me, I agree that there are many CA's that have never even been in a tree, not cool, but I deal with it. Nothing I can do about it. Like TV said, its coming, we cant change that. Me, I will get on board, not because I want to flash it around, but because paper is everything, people love to feel that they have the best and paper helps that along. I do agree that they, need to consolidate all of them, like many off you, I don't have the time, or the money to do all of them, all the time. Right now I am working on my Muni and CTSP. I will get the CTRA when I am done with the others. I have alot of experience, however, every time I study, I pick up something new, maybe its not a huge gain , but all the little ones add up and each day I get more and more edumacated. I understand the frustration, its no fun when your not certified and you know damn well that you are better than the guy who is. That's why I went after it, was tired of losing jobs to a book arb, that had never even put on a saddle. I will say this, I do feel like I accomplished something when I passed the test. I would work to the same standards with or without the CA and did for years, only when they made it computer based and available locally, did I find the time to get it done. Now that I have, it has opened doors. I realize that there are many on here who could teach all of us a thing or two, but no matter how much knowledge you have, if you cant prove it............. These certs are a way of providing proof that you had enough knowledge to atleast pass the test. It also lets the customer know that you are not some joker who watched some of AA videos and now thinks he can do what we do. You may be the best in your area, but what separates you from AA (I'll leave that one out there!) in the eyes of the customer?
These walnuts that I am on right now (pics coming as soon as I get a new I-Phone cord!) I was $500 more than Davey and several others. I pulled out my binder with all my certs, license's,insurance and bonds. I got the job, just because he felt that he was in the best hands with me. Davey could have done this just the same as me, and they have a few CA's on staff, but I had the paper.
Dont like all the certs!, I understand, but don't beat us up for going after it! Some of you guys on here absolutely have the knowledge,I really don't understand why ya don't get it, it sure isn't going to hurt you!


P.S.
I love how AA has become a reference for all things bad in the tree world. How fitting.
Now everybody cool your jets and remember, you could be in a "dangerous" tree
 to all


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

sgreanbeans said:


> lol, u guys will fight over anything! I get the certs because, although I realize the cert does not make the arb, it does make you more appealing to the customer, if you are lucky enough to have a customer who cares, and that is different from place to place. There are many guys on here who don't have any certs, that have more knowledge than me, no biggie, they choose not to get it, I did. Believe me, I agree that there are many CA's that have never even been in a tree, not cool, but I deal with it. Nothing I can do about it. Like TV said, its coming, we cant change that. Me, I will get on board, not because I want to flash it around, but because paper is everything, people love to feel that they have the best and paper helps that along. I do agree that they, need to consolidate all of them, like many off you, I don't have the time, or the money to do all of them, all the time. Right now I am working on my Muni and CTSP. I will get the CTRA when I am done with the others. I have alot of experience, however, every time I study, I pick up something new, maybe its not a huge gain , but all the little ones add up and each day I get more and more edumacated. I understand the frustration, its no fun when your not certified and you know damn well that you are better than the guy who is. That's why I went after it, was tired of losing jobs to a book arb, that had never even put on a saddle. I will say this, I do feel like I accomplished something when I passed the test. I would work to the same standards with or without the CA and did for years, only when they made it computer based and available locally, did I find the time to get it done. Now that I have, it has opened doors. I realize that there are many on here who could teach all of us a thing or two, but no matter how much knowledge you have, if you cant prove it............. These certs are a way of providing proof that you had enough knowledge to atleast pass the test. It also lets the customer know that you are not some joker who watched some of AA videos and now thinks he can do what we do. You may be the best in your area, but what separates you from AA (I'll leave that one out there!) in the eyes of the customer?
> These walnuts that I am on right now (pics coming as soon as I get a new I-Phone cord!) I was $500 more than Davey and several others. I pulled out my binder with all my certs, license's,insurance and bonds. I got the job, just because he felt that he was in the best hands with me. Davey could have done this just the same as me, and they have a few CA's on staff, but I had the paper.
> Dont like all the certs!, I understand, but don't beat us up for going after it! Some of you guys on here absolutely have the knowledge,I really don't understand why ya don't get it, it sure isn't going to hurt you!
> 
> ...



More important imo....required ceu's (30 credit hours min per yr. increment) that bring you updated science. Things are changing at blurring speed now. Exciting times to be an arb. Read Mattheck., Schwarze, Shigo, Luly, Urban, Brudi, skip the LXT posts and learn what "the body language of trees" means.


----------



## sgreanbeans (Oct 27, 2011)

treevet said:


> More important imo....required ceu's (30 credit hours min per yr. increment) that bring you updated science. Things are changing at blurring speed now. Exciting times to be an arb. Read Mattheck., Schwarze, Shigo, Luly, Urban, Brudi, skip the LXT posts and learn what "the body language of trees" means.


 
"the body language of trees" that sounds interesting, Shigo? I agree with the ceu's. I have a whole bunch done and need to send them in!


----------



## NCTREE (Oct 27, 2011)

treevet said:


> (who is this new fool Peonis?).



EH!otstir:


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

sgreanbeans said:


> "the body language of trees" that sounds interesting, Shigo? !



Mattheck


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

lxt said:


> Yeah I didnt see your name on that list of over 700 Trace idiots!!!
> 
> 
> LXT.........


 
Guy, Treeseer, had an article referenced in the course manual.

can't link as it is from another forum....pm me if you'd like me to email it to you


----------



## lxt (Oct 27, 2011)

treevet said:


> A loophole??? WTF that mean dipschit? "Certification sounds like a "loop hole" around an ordinance...." What? Duh!:jester:
> 
> And what Cert did the NAA regulate. (Im so Dumb & Old I foget) You are in the upper echelon of great ones on this forum. You disappear for large blocks of time, then all of a sudden you are back, uggh, and blabbing bullshat everywhere. How bout making this one of those times you disappear? AA kicked your ascs(< I cant spell) big time....we all saw it....it was embarassing to watch and demeaning to mankind in general (like those "unmanly" commercials I star in). Go run to your momma before yo daddy, AA comes on this thread and whups up on you again lol. OOOOOuw he gonna sue me  dern I wet myself again.
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE]



WOW...........all that senseless posting to prove nothing, You sitting in your soiled depends again?

Vet.........AA much like you makes threats & cant back em up!! He had his own thread deleted cause I returned & kicked his AZZ!! much like Im doing to you on here!!! 

Now enough about your Dad! The cert you speak of is as dumb as you (if not dumber), you just dont like the fact you stupidly paid for a Cert that has a strong showing in Hong Kong & British Columbia.........LOL, maybe AA`s neon earmuffs got caught in a sensitive spot on you to a point where medical attention is needed...........you keep wishing for it to be needed (cert that is) & when you put your dentures in the glass by your bedstand tonight...it`ll all be ok in the morning!

Well pap.....I do consult in your state, from wellsville up to the far reaches of toledo & everywhere in between along with West Virginia to Philadelphia, new jersey (on occasion) & elsewhere!! where have you been? I know stuck!.....stuck in ohio cause you couldnt land a gig anywhere else due to hazmat laws preventing you from carrying your oxygen & Preparation H together, you grow a little mom & pop shop tree biz & think at 94 1/2 you can go get educated & make the 1 little Cert a law??? Laughable it is!!! LMFAO

Like I said ya dust collector, Ive been to meetings in your state & there is nothing c`mon in regards to Tree Risk asskisser Certification..........right now in Toledo is a right of away expansion project going through wetlands.......every Govt agency from local level to federal level is there.........NO TALK OF TREE RISK BS........

You are far worse than AA, atleast he knows he needs improvement & refrains from engaging in stupid banter with those who can obviously kick his arse verbally......you on the other hand......Im thinking while the home nurse was wiping you she let go & your head hit the coffee table............Now get outta here you non climbing, minimum wage violating, illegal immigrant hiring I have to sit whilst I pee pathetic tree trimmer............yeah tree trimmer!! cause what other Certs you got? uh pap!

This little school girl known as tree vet is the purest form of cry baby......C`mon Vet throw another tantrem & take a month off like before!!!!!  Cmon show us how much a man you are!!!! cry & whine like you did when you left, cmon put the remote away, shut off sesame street & show us!! 

I take time off cause I was cut in half literally!!!!!! & am back doing trees, no crying here!! I come back to a gutless lawnmower riding hack threatening to sue me & pretending he ran me off...............I came back & proved otherwise & now Ill contend with you!! Yeah, take blocks of time off..............I was in the hospital ya wang, ya didnt hear me crying & whining about leaving this site & never coming back..............

I have no respect for you, you are lower than AA..............you whine & cry & want sympathy like a little girl, your types discust me....now take you ball & go home crybaby! 





LXT......................


----------



## lxt (Oct 27, 2011)

treevet said:


> since turn around is fair play thought I'd fix your post as you really meant it to read...see above.opcorn:


 

As with all things in life.......you dont have the ability to do anything first!!! you have to copy someones actions to make you feel good...........you are a funny dumb ole bastid!!!! LMFAO

cant imagine how with your intellect you could pass any exam!!! How bout I sit beside you so you can copy my answers? you`ll atleast pass then!!



LXT............


----------



## lxt (Oct 27, 2011)

treevet said:


> More important imo....required ceu's (30 credit hours min per yr. increment) that bring you updated science. Things are changing at blurring speed now. Exciting times to be an arb. Read Mattheck., Schwarze, Shigo, Luly, Urban, Brudi, focus on LXT posts and learn more than you ever could! "the body language of trees" means.


 


LMFAO.................I have all those books & more sweetheart!! BTW, check out Arborist News...I think Feb 2009 edition, Tree risk Assessment............there is a pic of a girl? with a Level on a tree!! talk about scientific, now all we have to do is go to Lowes, spend 10 bucks on a level & we can properly assess the lean of a tree......awe go ahead, throw some fancy geometry terms in the report, call it mitigation factors or whatever & sell your self as a tree risk asskisser.

yep thats the science of it!! a Level from Lowes......LMFAO!




LXT.................


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 27, 2011)

Yeah, but if ya get the cert, you can use fancified terms like "evaluations", instead of just plain old "estimates".


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

lxt said:


> LMFAO.................I have all those books & more sweetheart!! BTW, check out Arborist News...I think Feb 2009 edition, Tree risk Assessment............there is a pic of a girl? with a Level on a tree!! talk about scientific, now all we have to do is go to Lowes, spend 10 bucks on a level & we can properly assess the lean of a tree......awe go ahead, throw some fancy geometry terms in the report, call it mitigation factors or whatever & sell your self as a tree risk asskisser.
> 
> yep thats the science of it!! a Level from Lowes......LMFAO!
> LXT.................



Damn Suzie, didn't mean to get ya so worked up. You're quite emotional aren't ya. 

Got a rain day today. Gotta go work on my desk doing very important things. Me and AA will be back and slap ya around :deadhorse: a little more later.....I promise. Try not to get cut in half anymore lol.


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

ps....lemme see a pict of all those books ya got....I got you pegged as a Major League poo spewer.


----------



## lxt (Oct 27, 2011)

treevet said:


> ps....lemme see a pict of all those books ya got....I got you pegged as a Major League poo spewer.


 
you want a pic of my books??? what kind of online pervert are ya!!! LOL

Going round with you is fun Vet!! whatever makes you happy & if AA wants to chime in?.....hell the more the merrier, what books you want pictures of? MTWFA hand book, First Energy Transmission Forester Inspector training manual to the wild trees & many in between!!! MTWFA is the Mass Tree Wardens & Foresters Association....this publication helped me by providing references to neighboring towns in regards to tree care & accepted practices so they could be accepted as "Tree City USA"

So really I advocate alot more about tree care than you know or think, I am on the list for Dupont in regrards to enviromental studies which will have me traveling around the country no doubt!! On a serious note & not bashing you......you have to agree this certification thing is getting ridiculous!! I dont down anyone for wanting to further educate themselves.....but then lets make it part of a licensing program nationwide (god am I really saying this?)...........& incorporate all aspects in to the testing!

I just hate watching TCIA & ISA make up new Certs, promote them & try to push them as "law" into this trade, its just plain out right Greed & political propaganda to take even more money away from an already burdened trade! But thats my opinion, any way hope you did well on the exam!

Take care!


LXT.............................


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

lxt said:


> you want a pic of my books??? what kind of online pervert are ya!!! LOL
> 
> Going round with you is fun Vet!! whatever makes you happy & if AA wants to chime in?.....hell the more the merrier, what books you want pictures of? MTWFA hand book, First Energy Transmission Forester Inspector training manual to the wild trees & many in between!!! MTWFA is the Mass Tree Wardens & Foresters Association....this publication helped me by providing references to neighboring towns in regards to tree care & accepted practices so they could be accepted as "Tree City USA"
> 
> ...



Thanks LXT, but I don't see this as greed. I also don't see it as taking much money away from me but rather enabling me to make more and I hardly feel burdoned. Feeling a little blessed lately actually. But, as pointed out by many, I been around for long time so I should be in this position (got play your cards right to get here tho )

This program was initiated by some kind of grant involved with the Forestry Dept. after a couple of deaths from tree failures and morphed into the ISA involvement and this program, as I remember the instructor mentioned. This is on the plate internationally as a common goal of the arboriculture community. Why? Taken from "Perceptions of Tree Risk Assessment" by Sharon Lilly" June, 2011 Arb. News

problem 1. Within most countries there is no standard or clear definition of what a basic visual tree risk assessment entails, leading to disputes in court and misaligned client expectations.

problem 2. Professional arborists often vary significantly in their assessment of tree risk.

problem 3. Fear of litigation can, and often does, lead to the unnecessary removal of trees.

problem 4. Perception of risk differs within society and among arborists and perceived risk from trees is often much, much greater than statistics bear out. 

The upcoming ANSI A300 Tree Risk Assessment publication will establish a definition and standard. This I assume has already been, in theory, established in this course and will evolve as do all ANSI Standards with periodic review by peers and be included in the evolving and maturing course that must be revisited by cert holders in ceu's and 4 year re taking of the course in total.


----------



## Toddppm (Oct 27, 2011)

This certification requires 30 ceu's a year or over 3 years like the CA?


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 27, 2011)

To be honest, it sounds like something some miserable old bastard would come up with/and/or endorse.. while he's on the way out... as a last grab type deal maybe. Just saying. 

I have certainly seen much worse though.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 27, 2011)

"The upcoming ANSI A300 Tree Risk Assessment publication will establish a definition and standard. "

yo vet, this has been out for months. http://secure.isa-arbor.com/webstor...ard-a-Tree-Structure-Assessment-Part-9-P479C2

I do not recommend buying it for tree workers. The BMP will be out soon--everyone should have that, unless $10 is too much for the "already overburdened trade"smen...

"Yeah I didnt see your name on that list of over 700 Trace idiots!"

timing has not been right. actually i plan to be in the pnw before long and challenge the test to bypass the course fee. Or I may pay for it all and see how it is taught these days, compared to how I did it. re article cited yes it's been 5 years and I still stand behind it. anyone who gets 80% or better on the test gets a burger and a beer at the MN, WI, IN, KY, ON etc. meetings I'll be at this winter, or at expo. Just pm me the answers. 

Yes this will be my 6th Cert and yes they are a good investment. Excellent posts by sgreenbeans etc on this in between the other... conversation.

CERTIFICATIONS AND REGISTRATIONS FOR TREE WORK

If a landscaping company wants to provide tree service to their clients, they should know about certification and registration opportunities in that field. When trees are evaluated and managed by qualified people according to industry standards, there is less concern about malpractice and lawsuits against business liability insurers. Lawsuits over trees have caused increased premiums and canceled policies for landscaping companies. 
Three tree organizations—ASCA, TCIA and ISA--work toward the professional development of their members, and the overall advancement of their branches of the tree care industry. Below is a brief recap of these organizations’ programs. You may want to contact them directly for more information about who they are and what they do. 

The American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) was developed to preserve the highest standards of performance in the field of arboricultural consulting. ASCA consulting arborists possess a high level of technical and business skills, making them the preferred choice as experts. ASCA members are experienced in legal, environmental and regulatory arenas, among others - giving you the distinct advantage when you select a designated consulting arborist. 
ASCA's consulting arborists are committed to continuing their development of knowledge and skills, participating in continuing education to maintain their membership. Their professional training keeps them current on arboricultural issues. Consulting arborists are also set apart by ethical and professional codes, which are part of their membership. They serve as independent resources, rendering professional and credible opinions when they are enlisted as experts by the many industries they serve. 
The Tree Care Industry Association (TCIA) Accreditation "seal of approval" helps consumers find tree care companies that have been inspected and accredited based on adherence to industry standards for quality and safety, maintenance of trained, professional staff and dedication to ethics and quality in business practices. They provide industry-standard written estimates. They carry sufficient insurance coverage and employ Certified Arborists. 

The International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) has been working hard with their members to raise the standard of professional tree care. The decision to choose the right arborist is very important. Trees should be managed like any other long-term investment, because their value and contributions can appreciate if managed well, or depreciate if neglected. The decision was once a simple one. Choose an ISA Certified Arborist. 

Now, the ISA has been listening to their credential holders and has responded by developing a career path in arboriculture through our certification programs. This benefits the professional, and it will benefit you when hiring professional tree care. The ISA Certification credentials are based on the knowledge required to obtain each one.

ISA Certified Arborist - This is the largest group of credential holders. These professional arborists have a minimum of three years experience in some aspect of tree care and have passed an exam developed by an international panel of experts. The exam extensively covers every aspect of tree care and the individuals must have an acceptable level of knowledge in all areas of arboriculture.


ISA Certified Arborist/ Utility Specialist - This certification is for professional arborists who are ISA Certified Arborists in good standing and have additional experience in the specialty area of tree care around power lines. The utility specialists work for utility companies, their contractors or consultants. One of the certification objectives is to provide the public and those in government with a means to identify those professionals who have demonstrated, through a professionally developed exam and education program, that they have a thorough knowledge of line clearance vegetation management.



ISA Certified Arborist/ Municipal Specialist - This certification is also for professional arborists who are ISA Certified Arborists in good standing and have additional experience in the specialty area of urban trees. The municipal specialists work for cities and states, parks, contractors or consultants. One of the certification objectives is to provide the public and those in government with a means to identify those professionals who have demonstrated, through a professionally developed exam and education program, that they have a thorough knowledge of establishing and maintaining trees in a community.

ISA Certified Tree Worker/Climber Specialists - These credential holders have a minimum of 18 months experience professionally climbing trees in a safe and efficient manner to perform tree care. They have knowledge in the major aspects involved in tree care including, pruning, removal, cabling and safety. They must pass a knowledge exam and a skills exam conducted by trained evaluators.


ISA Board-Certified Master Arborist - This credential is designed for arborists who have reached the pinnacle of their profession. To sit for the exam, individuals must be a Certified Arborist in good standing and have obtained other prerequisites, or "points" defined by ISA. A minimum of eight points are required, obtained through measurable experience, formal education, related credentials, or professional experience. The computer-based exam covers science, practice and management.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 27, 2011)

attached is open for constructive criticism


----------



## treevet (Oct 27, 2011)

I may have some comments later if you are looking for some guy. But here you have 2 fairly different arborists of similar age and time in in their careers. One is prone to write articles and give seminars, the other is more likely to read articles and attend seminars. Both read profusely. One is less in the field day to day while the other, in the field 6 days a week and a hands on arborist 8 plus hours daily all year. What do they have in common? 

Both respect learning and research and the betterment of their profession and the improvement of arboriculture as a whole. Both appreciate the credential and the entity that judges proficiency to award them. At 60 give or take a couple of years, these senior arborists are (can't speak entirely for him) in a good place in their lives it appears. Something to learn from in that alone.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 28, 2011)

well your picture's better anyway...right now yes i'm in the field <50% but when shoulders rehab that'll be >50% for sure. I'd rather do the work than merely report on it, but that's just me.

A lot of the opinions expressed here about hands-off and incompetent consulting I cannot argue with. But many full-time consultants stay familiar with the field that they worked in and do excellent work.

Overgeneralizations and oversimplifications are mental shortcuts that lead to bad decisions in the field and in reports, and can be fatal in both. 

No I was not looking for reviews; that piece is 5 years old. but it still represents my thinking and that is always open to change based on new information. :msp_wink:

Re mitigating risk by removal and other means, here's the earlier TCI piece. See you around! View attachment 204681


----------



## lxt (Oct 28, 2011)

Its not that $10 dollars is a burden.............C`mon Seer, its the $250 here, $500 there, $125 over there & so on...not including my time & travel...!

I also understand why such education is needed...however another cert? not sure such is a need! I think it will lead to further incompetency in some ways.........Jr gets his 4 year degree & this cert...but has never been in the air....how is he gonna assess that?

Tree risk & hazard assessment is a first taught step in this trade, we all have went through tailgate meetings, on site evaluations, talked with our foreman in our learning years to determine safe ascent & how to safely work the tree.....Hell, Ive been 30-40ft in the air & looked into a hollow that I didnt want to climb above!!!! a hollow not seen from the ground...

Everyday while I was an apprentice I was asked questions on how, why, when, etc.. It was a standard to be taught the hazards & risks involved....on top of inspecting not only the tree but the root system, surroundings, land & noticeable defects present!

I just think this is common sense, 101 stuff that most have learned along the way & to create a Cert & give that holder authority is just plain out right wrong! you can defend it all ya want........but for someone to tell me that a tree is good/bad & they havent done or cant do a complete inspection is ridiculous!!! I know you guys think this Cert will help you....understand this: Jr with a 2 year forestry degree & some Certs will end up being your boss!!! when it comes down to it & I have seen it first hand 25yrs in the biz & just about every Cert one can hold..................& bam, Jr who makes less per hour & has a degree will remain while the truly knowledgeable are let go!!!!

Certs dont make you better............they make you accountable! so whos fault will it be? the CA, BMCA, TRACE, LCTT, ASCA, CTSP.... when all have their names on the project? seriously look at all those certs!!!! really, how many more do we need?



LXT...................


----------



## treeseer (Oct 28, 2011)

I also understand why such education is needed...however another cert? not sure such is a need! I think it will lead to further incompetency in some ways.........Jr gets his 4 year degree & this cert...but has never been in the air....how is he gonna assess that?

*by hiring you or me, same as is done when other specialists are needed--soil, tomograph, legfal etc.

Tree risk & hazard assessment is a first taught step in this trade, we all have went through tailgate meetings, on site evaluations, talked with our foreman in our learning years to determine safe ascent & how to safely work the tree.....Hell, Ive been 30-40ft in the air & looked into a hollow that I didnt want to climb above!!!! a hollow not seen from the ground...

*me three, but that is not all there is to it.

Everyday while I was an apprentice I was asked questions on how, why, when, etc.. It was a standard to be taught the hazards & risks involved....on top of inspecting not only the tree but the root system, surroundings, land & noticeable defects present!

*i got little when i started...anyway that is not all there is to it.

...understand this: Jr with a 2 year forestry degree & some Certs will end up being your boss...

*yes college is often overrated--all I got is a GED so the BCMA helps me with that. So will the QTRA or whatever they will call it

Certs dont make you better....really, how many more do we need?

*Look at other professions and countries. England has tons more for tree guys. This is not a big deal. The expense is minor compared to other payments, and brings excellent rewards, among them being in the habit of constantly learning and growing and changing as a person and a professional. Yes, field experience is very helpful--50/50 with book learning is good, too far in either direction leaves one deficient imo.

Folks need to do the math in terms of $/day or /10 years and compare cert cost (ceus can be cheap if you are smart about it) to their overall gross, and their market, skill, goals etc, and decide. 

Relying on the orgs' sales hype, or on the anti-cert rants here, can lead one astray.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 28, 2011)

I was actually gonna call for a risk assessment on these 5 trees this morning , but when we saw the termites holding hands keeping the trees stood up I thought we may agree on removal View attachment 204701
View attachment 204702


----------



## lxt (Oct 28, 2011)

TC....that what you have pictured right there is case in point! did you need a tree risk assessor? hell No!! thats were things will get screwed up.....when a tree is that noticeably bad, why bring in another person? are you telling me that a CA cant make that assessment or any tree care person with reasonable common sense?...true some lack this.

Guy.....you keep saying thats not all there is to it..............I agree & yet disagree, To me if there is noticeable risk & a hazard involved, Then remove it!! If the tree is healthy & some home owner is concerned & the tree care person shows up to sell them a removal.......Insistant on it!! then thats were I see this Cert coming into play!

But due to Human intervention & the over removal of city trees or mature trees for the purposes of population expansion....then a Cert is ridiculous...........what is needed in those instances is purposeful laws to eliminate such needless destruction! you all know as well as I do........make this Cert an authority & corruption through palm greasings will take place!! bank on it!!

trust me, with the health issues I had this year if I thought a Certification such as this would put less physical strain on me, all the while making a living.......I wouldnt hesitate for a minute! I just honestly think we all have assessed tree risk & hazards through out our careers.....its par for the course! really what more can be taught? yeah we can go into the wind load forces, leeching effects, erosion, lean & weight load, etc....In the end the average person will not care....! if its hanging over their newborns bedroom its cmon down!!




LXT.................


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 28, 2011)

lxt said:


> TC....that what you have pictured right there is case in point! did you need a tree risk assessor? hell No!! thats were things will get screwed up.....when a tree is that noticeably bad, why bring in another person? are you telling me that a CA cant make that assessment or any tree care person with reasonable common sense?...true some lack this.
> 
> Guy.....you keep saying thats not all there is to it..............I agree & yet disagree, To me if there is noticeable risk & a hazard involved, Then remove it!! If the tree is healthy & some home owner is concerned & the tree care person shows up to sell them a removal.......Insistant on it!! then thats were I see this Cert coming into play!
> 
> ...


 
Kinda like this limp #### piece of garbage hanging over the roof half dead and leaning to the point that I felt bad even asking the guy to climb it , That will be fun to hear how they will justify me lightning it up a bit and a program to correct the lean , maybe they will recommend a Guy cable installed in case "she decides she's gonna go " , but God forbid we REMOVE it because its still got leaves at the bottom and it looks like it has kicked the leaf scorch View attachment 204747


----------



## treevet (Oct 28, 2011)

Whatever "they" decide....if they are ISA Certed TRACE, it will be a (commonly accepted as the standard in the industry) systematic evaluation with nothing missed or left for chance and considered with education and knowledge with many factors based on current science and a report with an overall rating given for the "owner to make the final decision".... as opposed to "uh oh, payment due on my double wide....and/or uh oh... bucket just broke down.......bad boy just gotta come down".


----------



## BC WetCoast (Oct 29, 2011)

Take my comments here for what they are worth. I'm TRACE certified (have been for 3 years) as well as a CA among others. 

A certification is only worth what the buying market perceives its worth to be. I'm the holder of a couple of certs, which provided great education, but the market did not perceive their value and they really did nothing for me.

However, in the case of the CA and TRACE it is different in our area. Of the 7 municipalities I work in on a weekly basis, 6 of them require a permit for tree removal. Size limits vary from 8" diameter to 24" diameter, but the permit is required and the fines for removing without a permit are extreme (up to $10,000). Is this good or bad? Doesn't matter, the government represents the MAJORITY of the people, so that must be what the people want. In order to get a tree removal permit, the applications must be accompanied by a CA Arborist report and if the justification for removal is hazard related then a TRACE analysis must be completed. 

To play the game, you follow the rules.

So to refute the state, 'this is common sense',we don't need more certs. I will describe other professions. 120 years ago, medical doctors were often barbers as well. As our understanding of human anatomy and disease increased, the medical professon became more specialized. We as a society demanded more training and knowledge and more than that proof that a person had that knowledge and training. What happens when you try and practice medicine without a licence? See you in court.

My example is extreme, but we are becoming a society of 'experts'. Time to hop on the bandwagon.

Our province has recently started an apprenticeship program for working residential arborists which will lead to a journeyman ticket (like plumbers, electricians, mechanics). This has been pushed by the big boys of the industry Bartlett, Davey etc.

Those that get on here and pontificate about how bad certs are - just remember the story of King Canute (google it).


----------



## tree MDS (Oct 29, 2011)

treevet said:


> Whatever "they" decide....if they are ISA Certed TRACE, it will be a (commonly accepted as the standard in the industry) systematic evaluation with nothing missed or left for chance and considered with education and knowledge with many factors based on current science and a report with an overall rating given for the "owner to make the final decision".... as opposed to "uh oh, payment due on my double wide....and/or uh oh... bucket just broke down.......bad boy just gotta come down".



Oh yeah, and you're such the tree hugger.. I suppose that's why you got that crane with the funny outriggers. Lol, the BS is really piling up now.


----------



## treevet (Oct 29, 2011)

BC WetCoast said:


> Take my comments here for what they are worth. I'm TRACE certified (have been for 3 years) as well as a CA among others.
> 
> A certification is only worth what the buying market perceives its worth to be. I'm the holder of a couple of certs, which provided great education, but the market did not perceive their value and they really did nothing for me.
> 
> ...



Very nice post. That is what keeps me around here......

That and keeping some of ya guys in line. Hey, its a job, and somebody's gotta do it :help:


----------



## lxt (Oct 29, 2011)

BC, its not complaining......."It is common sense", I highly doubt that the states are pushing for Tree Risk Certification.....Cmon, half the people dont even know what a CA is! Its not the people asking the Govt/States......Its the entities ISA & TCIA using member money to lobby for their own selfish agenda by making voluntary..........a requirement! Just wait...!

Doctors & barbers...........how about rancher & sherriff, there were alot of "double" lives especially in those days..........However, the comparison of this trade to that of health care is absurd! some might argue.......But, a hack tree service is abundant here...a hack Doctor goes to jail!! big difference!

I think what is being missed is the fact that Tree Risk Assessment & Hazards have been & are a basic 101 of anybody involved in the "hands On" part of this trade! Sorry, thats the facts!! (we dont need no more Certs) I was looking through my Arborist News magazine & a Tcia magazine & the Credentialing between the two is absolutely ridiculous!

C`mon: aerial lift specialist, climber specialist, "Accredited", CTSP, CA, BMCA, utility specialist, municipal specialist, certified tree worker, Tree risk assessor certification & I think there are a few more........Not to include "Arbor Master Training"( this is funny, think of stripes when bill murray says army training sir) those guys came out & put on a riggin class when i was in the Union....they got laughed off the site....we all walked away!

I remember joking about some of the above certs before they even became certs!! I can understand CA & BMCA...beyond that its all a bunch of BS & for the money.....plain & simple! Regardless of what is said Im sure this cert will become one & then another to follow & so on............Funny how in the current issue of arborist news they have a reply to a gentlemen in regards to "how many is enough" pertaining to CA`s.............so others & myself are not the only ones thinking its getting out of line!!!




LXT.....................


----------



## ForTheArborist (Oct 29, 2011)

It may be nothing in the rural areas and small towns to have the certs because there are so many trees anyway, and because there are not so many slicksters with the saws and there tree service overheads. Even if you are just a starving slickster with a chainsaw and tree service overhead out there, there's so many trees to work on that you're going to some kind of work without ruining the tree world entirely.

The urban areas are different. Slicksters are born here, and the rest of the world watches for them to make the latest moves. You're either the slickest or you're the starving monkey without a life. And if you are slick, you are going to absolutely con a bunch of people into removing their great old city trees for no reason except that's a living and for pride.

Herds of urban, starving slicksters + chainsaws + old growth urban trees = urban tree genocide. 

You start with certs, and you slow down the starving chainsaw rats swarming the tree service industry in the urban areas. You don't whine about how the new densely populated world needs to be ran the old way it was run without certifications. That talk is worth beans, and the rats/street tree hacks are taking down all the big trees. You would know this if you were current with the current state of urban small businesses like the urban contracting industry.

On the other hand though, keep smiting the certs because over whelming the industry with mandatory certs is not good either. Not sure that is so necessary though. Given exactly who tree service men are, I seriously doubt that anybody except tree service men (The sane ones) are going to implement more certs than are reasonably necessary because they cannot be as easily bent as the "money bag boys" can be that just want to play powerful over "chainsaw monkeys" and their money. 

And, if this were too much fer yu 2 redd good, jus gimme a mesage that yu not reading so good. opcorn:


----------



## jefflovstrom (Oct 29, 2011)

ForTheAction said:


> It may be nothing in the rural areas and small towns to have the certs because there are so many trees anyway, and because there are not so many slicksters with the saws and there tree service overheads. Even if you are just a starving slickster with a chainsaw and tree service overhead out there, there's so many trees to work on that you're going to some kind of work without ruining the tree world entirely.
> 
> The urban areas are different. Slicksters are born here, and the rest of the world watches for them to make the latest moves. You're either the slickest or you're the starving monkey without a life. And if you are slick, you are going to absolutely con a bunch of people into removing their great old city trees for no reason except that's a living and for pride.
> 
> ...




Hey FTA, I gave you a 'like' because , idk, wanna say 'Hi'? Come down to Sea Port Village on Tuesday. Off Pacific Highway. I will be there from 6am to 10am. 
Jeff :msp_thumbup:
You give me a headache trying to figure out what you are saying.


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 29, 2011)

I was just reading a thread on TB and there is a tree with BLS and heavy damage , there are so called educated arborists that are actually recommending installing a cable and fertilizing it , But also insisting that the HO sign a waiver after they recommended keeping the tree , I mean does anyone believe that a HO wouldn't feel a bit betrayed 5 years later when you basically stole there money and ended with the tree being fed into the chipper ... I see the need for assessment in areas like parks and high population , but in a RES setting they have no place .....I can't agree anymore with every post of LXT's common sense ....


----------



## lxt (Oct 29, 2011)

FTA....long winded & somewhat a hard read to put together there!

rats, streets, slicksters.............WTF, you been watching demolition man on HD again? I just drove by a competitor doing tree work an hour ago........not one cert he has & then you go into the city & there is the AA types...not a cert there either!!

All these Certs dont mean anything if no one has to have them in the first place, I had to register my biz with the Atty General`s office, have a slew of Certs, licenses, diplomas, etc.. all for the good of the fight......yeah right!!! then some grass cutter & his crew come in & BAM...........now their a tree service, no Certs, no nothing & making the same as me!

I say keep the CA & BMCA Cert.......upgrade the testing to truly reflect something worth a squat & then make that the standard, when any body can test (fresh outta school types), office help, utility personnel (required) & others that have no clue about the "hands on" part of the biz......then we will have way too many with a cert & no true knowledge!!!



LXT.......................


----------



## ForTheArborist (Oct 29, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> Hey FTA, I gave you a 'like' because , idk, wanna say 'Hi'? Come down to Sea Port Village on Tuesday. Off Pacific Highway. I will be there from 6am to 10am.
> Jeff :msp_thumbup:
> You give me a headache trying to figure out what you are saying.


 
I gotta pass on that. 

The Home Depot boys can take care of you. They are fit and ready to fill the bill. opcorn:


----------



## ForTheArborist (Oct 29, 2011)

Kidding


----------



## treevet (Oct 30, 2011)

sometimes when you take the opposite side of a common sense issue agreed upon by a majority of intelligent people involved in the issue you can seem the rebel maybe in sort of a positive light. but once you go on and on about it blathering like a fool you sort of take on a deranged image. very thin line.

what this is all about is merely seeking or desiring perfection in professionalism. if you fall off a little in this quest you are still head and shoulders above those seeking or firmly established in mediocrity. i feel very sorry for those seeking/situated in mediocrity as they are far worse off than those fading into or mired in incompetence as those of mediocrity aren't ever forced out of it like the complete incompetents. what a miserable depressing life.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 30, 2011)

Common sense #1: "Assessments have no place in residential settings." :confused2:

Tell that to 100s of my clients, who hire me to do just that.

Common sense #2: 'We all learned that assessment stuff when we learned how to be tree guys".

 

Common sense = "I don't have time to think about it--just cut it down."

It's easy to point to dead branches and call a tree a POS. It's harder to see the green branches and plan for future growth. But that's what arborists do.

"So to refute the state, 'this is common sense',we don't need more certs. I will describe other professions. 120 years ago, medical doctors were often barbers as well. As our understanding of human anatomy and disease increased, the medical profession became more specialized. We as a society demanded more training and knowledge and more than that proof that a person had that knowledge and training. What happens when you try and practice medicine without a licence? See you in court.

My example is extreme, but we are becoming a society of 'experts'. Time to hop on the bandwagon.
Our province has recently started an apprenticeship program for working residential arborists which will lead to a journeyman ticket (like plumbers, electricians, mechanics). This has been pushed by the big boys of the industry Bartlett, Davey etc.
Those that get on here and pontificate about how bad certs are - just remember the story of King Canute "

Good points. The tide is rising.


----------



## lxt (Oct 30, 2011)

Oooooh, I keep seeing our trade being compared to the medical field..............BIG DIFFERENCE!!

Seer....you say hundred(s) of clients.........tell us! I gots ta know, how bad are their trees to justify a specialized Certification over & above being a CA or BMCA?......seriously? you reply only to certain parts of previous posts leaving the majority of important issues alone!!!

like it or not.............assessing the hazards & risks associated with trees has been an ongoing part of this job/trade for years & it is a "best guess" common sense issue, you can try to rationalize it with science & that is fine............but aint no one on here a scientist!!!!........so when using other professions to try & justify why this Cert is necessary.....how bout using this field?

I highly doubt that the "science" you guys are talking about will matter to the average home owner or city/twp as most in this current economy are strapped for money & any time Ive gotten bid requests & entered into the bid war.....Lowest BID always wins!!! They want a low cost provider plain & simple & as far as certs......Well, Ive bid for the Commonwealth & they have a CA on staff in each district (penndot) Ive bid for Pa DCNR & they have a CA on staff, bid for PA game Commision & ditto..........guess what? None of these entities cared about Certs.......just a low cost provider properly equipped, Insured & with the ability to adhere to the specifications set forth!!

This is why I complain about more Certs..........the ones I have mean nothing!!! I have lost all the Bids stated above to Non Certified contractors, I have pleaded my case & with no care from any of them..............Hell the gamelands contract I bid on had wetlands, streams & waterways..........the $7800.00 contractor dropped the tyrees in such & left em, I pitched a ##### & was told the waterways act did not have power in this setting, so if a federal/state mandated act has no power? well you figure it out!!...maybe certain states this Cert will be a prize???? but not here & I dont see it being an issue for a very long time!!!





LXT.................


----------



## treeclimber101 (Oct 30, 2011)

treevet said:


> sometimes when you take the opposite side of a common sense issue agreed upon by a majority of intelligent people involved in the issue you can seem the rebel maybe in sort of a positive light. but once you go on and on about it blathering like a fool you sort of take on a deranged image. very thin line.
> 
> what this is all about is merely seeking or desiring perfection in professionalism. if you fall off a little in this quest you are still head and shoulders above those seeking or firmly established in mediocrity. i feel very sorry for those seeking/situated in mediocrity as they are far worse off than those fading into or mired in incompetence as those of mediocrity aren't ever forced out of it like the complete incompetents. what a miserable depressing life.


 
That seems to be a bit personal , but I can guarantee at 60 I won't be running a bunch of 3rd hand machines , I can be what I choose daily, go into debt as far as "I" want , and as far as education is concerned you not as far ahead of the curve as you want to believe , your knowledge is store bought and it shows really and I would take you on a "consultation" with me anytime you want I doubt that you or anyone else could wow me with anything ....and as far as the pole clipping tree expert I find a long winded post of nothing to say just as meaningless as a post of one single word


----------



## treevet (Oct 30, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


> That seems to be a bit personal , but I can guarantee at 60 I won't be running a bunch of 3rd hand machines ,



99 percent of what is on here is "personal" opinions.

How can you GUARANTEE what you are running at 60? Guarantee....what a joke. You'd be amazed at my net worth. I wouldn't be amazed at your net worth. I am proud of my collection of equipment and knowledge. Some of you think it will be easy to get where I am at my age and it is just a natural progression for some of you yayhoos....not even close. Doubt any 2 man op does what I do and have done over my career. 2 man crew or even much larger.

By the time you reach 60 with an attitude like the following post, my guess is you will be in a very similar situation that you are in now, if you're even still in this business.

Personal reply....to a personal post.


----------



## treevet (Oct 30, 2011)

treeclimber101 said:


> The line is growing when it comes to quivering little ####### here 1st was OD and then TV and from time to time AA , and countless others who can't stand the truth ... Not me I know exactly how big of a fat loser I am one step away from the meth clinic and lucky to not be in jail yet ...


 
sad, very sad


----------



## treeseer (Oct 30, 2011)

lxt said:


> I highly doubt that the "science" you guys are talking about will matter to the average home owner or city/twp as most in this current economy ...This is why I complain about more Certs..........the ones I have mean nothing!!! .



lxt, sorry that in your chosen market selling your chosen services they are not working out. For many others they are working well. Many client$ know the difference, and understand that science is not rationalization, and that a well-founded systematic assessment is better than a "common sense" gut call. But wahtever, if you are doing fine without them, what is there to complain about?


----------



## Bigus Termitius (Oct 30, 2011)

what a thread....

What I see are some good (and bad) points on all fronts, some better than others, but even some good points are squelched with playground antics, which is only counter productive. When you are up against an "establishment" you can NOT afford to sound like a hayseed, even when you're right. Likewise, when you are insisting on educational elitism, you need to play the part.

Not to say all are guilty....there are some awesome posts from all quarters.

Right or wrong, I'm all for these private regulation entities. The goverment, in this day and age, is a failure at best. We don't want that, IMHO. However, if they are not careful, their(private entities) influence can be diluted by the obvious failures greed and excessiveness will breed.

Where does that leave us?

Well, we might think about finding a tolerable middle ground where we can gain some _soul_idarity amongst us, or face the clipboards of wrath.....

.....the geek squads will have no mercy.

Hey Guy, some sweet input....as usual.


----------



## Pelorus (Oct 31, 2011)

treevet said:


> 99 percent of what is on here is "personal" opinions.
> 
> How can you GUARANTEE what you are running at 60? Guarantee....what a joke. You'd be amazed at my net worth. I wouldn't be amazed at your net worth. I am proud of my collection of equipment and knowledge. Some of you think it will be easy to get where I am at my age and it is just a natural progression for some of you yayhoos....not even close. Doubt any 2 man op does what I do and have done over my career. 2 man crew or even much larger.
> 
> ...




That is an amazing post. 
Makes me feel like I'm in the presence of an arboricultural Albert Schweitzer. or Superman.
OTOH, I've heard that it is best to never try to argue with an idiot. Cause they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.


----------



## lxt (Oct 31, 2011)

treeseer said:


> lxt, sorry that in your chosen market selling your chosen services they are not working out. For many others they are working well. Many client$ know the difference, and understand that science is not rationalization, and that a well-founded systematic assessment is better than a "common sense" gut call. But wahtever, if you are doing fine without them, what is there to complain about?


 
Its not that quality cant be sold Or that the Certs dont come in useful, I do my best to enlighten about "proper".....But Seer the bottom line is........most just want a low cost provider, I keep my Certs & prolly do as much consultation as many others cause Im in hope that one day they`ll mean something??? right now with the economy as bad as it is no one is gonna question a guy with or without Certs who pays his taxes while making a living for himself or his family...........its just not a good political move & once again it deals with money....tax base!

a well rounded systematic assessment? so let me see: the guy (kid) frsh outta college with a 2 yr forestry degree puts in a little time with...say arbormetrics, gets his CA, UA & then becomes a QTRA/TRACE (whatever their gonna call it) & now he is an authority on tree risk & hazard assessment?............Cmon, cause this is where I have a problem, Ive worked with the likes of what I just mentioned & some of these minnows cant even properly ID a tree!!!

Bottom line.............Most people I know will take common sense/gut call & be safe any day over some one selling a rationalized, scientific approach to mitigate what is clearly a "commonsense" hazard hanging over the house!!!





LXT................


----------



## treeseer (Oct 31, 2011)

"...most just want a low cost provider,...right now with the economy as bad as it is no one is gonna question a guy with or without Certs "

this is not the case with my clients, in the eastern usa. they do not trust tree guys in general, based on hearing highly biased condemnations of trees with easily manageable risk. And they definitely do NOT trust assessments based on a high target rating and "commonsense" approaches that ignore arboriculture. re the economy, that has been the chorus from poormouthing whiners for a long time. I hear it from some very rich people; poormouthing is best ignored imo.

"... so let me see: the guy (kid) frsh outta college with a 2 yr forestry degree puts in a little time with...say arbormetrics, gets his CA, UA & then becomes a QTRA/TRACE (whatever their gonna call it) & now he is an authority on tree risk & hazard assessment?............Cmon, cause this is where I have a problem..."

Me too, and many others. That is why the prerequisites are tougher than you describe and the test is tougher that anyone can imagine-- if they are relying on what they learned when they started out. What I want to know is, why'd they come out with these fancy colored sissy ropes? Brown manila is what I learned on, and it holds my tautline hitch just fine! Moneygrubbing gear supppliers--who do they think they are? And don't get me started on trucks--my horses work just fine, and they fertilize the trees as they work!

"Bottom line.............Most people I know will take common sense/gut call & be safe any day over some one selling a rationalized, scientific approach to mitigate what is clearly a "commonsense" hazard hanging over the house!!!"

lxt, I have no doubt that this is true. It all depends on the company you want to keep, and TRACE folks decided long ago they did not want to keep feeding on the bottom of the market, but to raise it instead. There is a growing market of clients who value knowledge and objectivity, and will pay for it. They want opinions coming from an organ somewhere higher than the gut. Actually, "gut" decisions have a long and storied history--the ancients believed that intelligence was housed somewhere between the spleen and the pancreas. Now these uppity modern scientists talk about the brain and logic--crazy! :alien2:

Re hanging, this is a hollow tree hanging over US Highway #1 on one side and City Hall on the other. The risk has been reduced to a tolerable level and the tree remains, with periodic care. But lxt and tc, if you are doing well by doing what you are doing, no worries, no dramas, it's all good! :biggrinbounce2:

View attachment 205101








LXT................[/QUOTE]


----------



## Bigus Termitius (Oct 31, 2011)

treeseer said:


> There is a growing market of clients who value knowledge and objectivity, and will pay for it. They want opinions coming from an organ somewhere higher than the gut. Actually, "gut" decisions have a long and storied history--the ancients believed that intelligence was housed somewhere between the spleen and the pancreas. Now these uppity modern scientists talk about the brain and logic--crazy!



The ancients weren't entirely wrong; the brain gut connection is well documented...scientifically.

Just thought I'd throw that out there for trivia's sake, it's interesting.

As is the info you provide in such threads, it's what we should all be interested to consider and convey, as arborists. I guess where I'm at on it, is to be able to inform the tree owner of the options in light of current understanding and let them choose. The idea of mercenary ArborCops running around trying to dictate to private sectors especially what can go and what must stay is nothing short of tyranny, in principle. And the tyranny ignorance connection is well documented, historically. We find failure in past science a smug sport, but there is as much, if not more, failed science being touted as cutting edge on a daily basis. Wherein we often find in the long run that the old wasn't all wrong after all, and hopefully we progress from there with a new understanding and respect for balance and freedom.

If a client wants to save their tree, I'm more than happy to assist in any way I can with the latest tools and tect, but if something doesn't feel right to them, or me, to some extent, 'modern' science be damned. There are some things in the realm of feelings, gut or otherwise, that even science troubles itself to explain, as the validity of the foresight of a sixth sense seems considerably documented as well. Now I know that you'll say to error on the side of caution is still an error, or something to that effect, point taken, but the corallary of cautious error is often enough more acceptable than its contrary.

I'll profit either way, as any one of us should, whether it's nursing an old tree through its last hours, or removing and replacing it with new life to care for. My bid is to invite and employ as much science as we can. That should give us new freedoms, but we’d best be mindful to maintain the old.

Not posting directly at you, but with you, just using your segment as an advantageous point of departure to share a few thoughts on all that's been shared and squandered here.


----------



## treeseer (Oct 31, 2011)

Bigus Termitius said:


> The ancients weren't entirely wrong; the brain gut connection is well documented...scientifically.
> Just thought I'd throw that out there for trivia's sake, it's interesting.
> As is the info you provide in such threads, it's what we should all be interested to consider and convey, as arborists. I guess where I'm at on it, is to be able to inform the tree owner of the options in light of current understanding and let them choose. The idea of mercenary ArborCops running around trying to dictate to private sectors especially what can go and what must stay is nothing short of tyranny, in principle. And the tyranny ignorance connection is well documented, historically. We find failure in past science a smug sport, but there is as much, if not more, failed science being touted as cutting edge on a daily basis. Wherein we often find in the long run that the old wasn't all wrong after all, and hopefully we progress from there with a new understanding and respect for balance and freedom.
> 
> ...



I agree 100%. This post has been nominated as Post of the Month for October!  

I'll paint that pic and propose specs tonight, thanks for asking, Del. :smile2:


----------



## treeseer (Oct 31, 2011)

Bigus Termitius said:


> ... There are some things in the realm of feelings, gut or otherwise, that even science troubles itself to explain, as the validity of the foresight of a sixth sense seems considerably documented as well. ...



Absolutely, and we should not forget all of the first five senses too. If sight and touch etc. find structural concerns in trunk or limbs, then cuts could be made at the blue marks. If structure looks and feels good, then they could be made at the green marks. All this after ascending along the yellow line via wraptor, footlock, whatever, using handsaw, and pole pruner to extend reach. If your climber can't tie into the top of that yellow line, train a new climber.
Below is using the ANSI Standards to guide the work. The first guide is the tree itself--those reiterations at the top are Natural Pruning Targets, showing where the tree wants to retrench its resources.

SAMPLE PRUNING SPECIFICATIONS

Scope:	Leaning trees on hillside

Objective: Enhance structural stability and symmetry; minimize lean, decay, weak attachments, and heavy ends.

Specifications:	General: All pruning shall be completed in compliance with A300 and Z133.1 Standards. 
Detail: Remove all dead branches >1”. 
Reduce all overextended branches back to a favorable lateral that is oriented away from the lean. Reduce rubbing or decayed or cracked or crowded branches to restore symmetry and maximize collection of sunlight. 

No more than 30% (20% at the green marks) removed from each tree with 1-3” cuts.

View attachment 205145


Again, this is basic tree pruning, isn't it?


----------



## jefflovstrom (Oct 31, 2011)

Guy, At what degree of lean is a tree a risk? 
Jeff


----------



## treeseer (Oct 31, 2011)

"It's always good to address structural concerns in the tree canopy. In this tree the main structural concern is that the whole tree leans so much that it's center of gravity is no longer over it's root plate. The root crown is so far to the left of the tree's crown that the photo doesn't even capture where the trunk meets the ground . Each time the ground is _saturated_ with water this tree is _likely_ leaning just a little more towards the buildings. 

How likely? Pruning = less lean How saturated? Looks like rocky soil there. 

"Aren't you forgetting to do a basic root crown inspection before ascending a seriously leaning tree?""

No. How "seriously"? does not look bad from here; these are oaks, not poplars!

"How about a pull test? 

Sure, could be done, go ahead and get a rope up there and pull on it. does not seem warranted based on facts so far.

Or guying before ascending? Trees do sometimes fall over and this one is in the process of doing so. 

note the progression of fear--"likely" to "seriously" to 'in the process of falling", all based on...what? 

I remember you had a co-worker climb a tree and that tree fall over with him in it. It could happen to this one, too. 

If this one has hypoxylon cakes at the base, I'd do the pull test, at least. We know nothing about the bases of these; no reason to assume the worst.

"What is being over looked here is this tree has no branches that even reach to the uphill side of the root crown."

We can't see that, and it is natural for branches to grow to the light. Should that be a death sentence?

"Also the trunk has a serious lean.

We heard you the first time. It's not looking that bad, from here.

"It is very basic pruning. Easy to do....and easy to suggest. Unfortunately it doesn't do much about the serious lean

We hard you the first two times. :msp_sneaky:

"or the fact that it has no crown growth on the up hill side of it's root crown.

It doesn't seem to need any. Too much shade over there.

The suggestion seems to be that someone that knows something about arboriculture would not suggest removing this tree. I believe suggesting that this tree be removed is sound arboriculture. Pruning this tree as you suggest is also sound arboriculture. It depends on what the client is willing to live with......risk removed......or risk reduced.

All risk is not removed. There are other trees, and meteors, and the godless Chinese communists, and salmonella. Clients decide what risk they will accept based on honest and knowledgeable prognoses based on reasonable care. Most clients would accept the risk, after all that sprawl is removed. 

" I would remove it if it were growing in my yard. Young trees are already there to take it's place, work with them.

You must be young and patient, but I am neither. Waiting decades for replacements might seem to make sense, but they will also lean to the light. What then? A 30-year logging rotation? Not a sustainable business model, or a recipe for landscape contributions. Why shouldn't we be willing to work with the older trees too? Pruning is basic, if one knows how to climb. I wonder how much of this resistance is due to the climbing challenge...?
Here's another big tree leaning over a US Highway, this time in IL. The roots were lifting on this one. Head for the fallout shelters! City pruned to our specs, the tree gets periodic care, City accepts the risk. My name's on it, and i sleep just fine, thanks. Note the horrific lack of branches on the side away from the lean--OMG!! The simple truth is that trees adapt to leans, and directional pruning, over time, and get more symmetrical and more strong. It's all a matter of thigmomorphogenesis, mechanoperception, calmodulin, and other stuff that we did NOT learn when we were just starting out, and cannot learn on internet forums. 

View attachment 205184
View attachment 205185
View attachment 205186
View attachment 205187
View attachment 205184
View attachment 205185
View attachment 205186
View attachment 205187

O and swede, all trees are risks, leaning or not. Or was that a trick question? Read Tree Statics--Europeans have done calculations on 1000's of trees reduced for stability. Parts of America seem to be still in Paul Bunyan mode, but trees and time are running out.


----------



## BC WetCoast (Oct 31, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> Guy, At what degree of lean is a tree a risk?
> Jeff


 
Depends.

If there is no target there is no risk.

Lean itself may not be an indicator of instability. 

If a tree is growing on coarse textured soils and the lean was caused phototropically then it could probably grow horizontal and still be stable.

On the other hand, a tall spindly tree, with a small root system, growing on fine textured (especially saturated) soils will probalby only be able to tolerate a few degrees of lean before something may happen.

You need to be able to read the tree, the soil and the surrounding conditions. 

Trees don't just tip over. There are always other factors in play. You could have rotational failures in the soil, where the entire ball of soil surrounding the root fails in shear in a rotational manner. You could have fine textured soils, which the fine roots don't hold well when saturated. Usually this happens during a storm. You could have root rot.

It's been my experience that you will have a mid stem snap failure significantly more often that you will have a toppling failure.


----------



## BC WetCoast (Nov 1, 2011)

One of the reasons the TRACE system was developed was to make the assessment process more objective and repeatable. In other words, whoever looks at the tree will come up with the same rating for the tree. In my experience, this is generally true. Different people may look at a tree slightly different but the rating may only differ a point or two.

I know there are people who don't accept my medical analogies, so let me try different ones. In the accounting world, there is GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) which guides how accountants report the financial information of a company. Think about how chaotic (more than it already is) the stock markets would be if every company did their financial reporting in a method of their own choosing?

In the structural engineering field, there are accepted methods of calculating loads, stresses and strains on buildings/bridges etc.

In my own profession of professional forestry, there are standards for timber cruising or scaling to determine how much wood is standing (or goes across the scale).

So there are standards in every professional walk of life. That is why there is ISO (International Standards Organization), ANSI, Underwriters Labs, Canadian Standards Assoc etc etc. Arboriculture is moving toward a more hierarchical structure, where the people who do the assessments and prescriptions don't necessarily do the work. You don't see the engineers building a bridge and you don't see the ironworkers doing the designing.

Maybe in your neck of the woods the market doesn't care about certifications and only worries about price. So yes, certifications will have little value to you. For us, those issues tend to be ethnically based rather than economically. 

There is a major muni street tree contract around here requires anyone using a saw must be a CA. This muni requires tree cutting permits for private trees and they strongly point you in the direction of those companies that they feel meet their standards (and there are several). 

Another place I see the same movement of change is in the field of worker safety. Most of our industrial clients have professional safety consultants (who charge out way more than we do) and we are required to be safety certified (usually by taking a course and test) before we can work on these properties. This is way past having a first aid kit and the occaisional safety meeting. 

To sum up my diatribe, arboriculture is becoming more professional, which comes with a level of responsibility and accountability. Those who don't want to accept the responsibility or accountability can do the work under the direction of those who do.


----------



## treeseer (Nov 1, 2011)

"Sure it's natural for branches to grow towards the light but where is the shade on the uphill side? I don't see it. Looks more like a leaning tree with just a touch of phototropism."

Phototropism causes lean; not sure how those 2 factors can be separated, or why, unless the implications of "lean" are exaggerated. A trained eye can tell whether and how much the lean has changed, and a trained mind can monitor that change if any and prescribe potential treatments. As BC notes, trees can be horizontal and reasonably stable, depending on soil, exposure, species (oak!), condition etc.

"....that tree is a piece of cake climb, if it doesn't fall over!

True, and saying 'it's in the process of falling over" with no evidence hypes the fear for both climber and client.

"Removing trees that have little to offer the landscape,"

Maybe you are blind to this value, but the owners were not. Read the OP; they agonized over this loss of asset.

"pose a risk to the property

All trees pose a risk--rationality, please. It's the RESIDUAL risk after pruning that the assessor communicates to the client, if they are able to think in 'tree time" and predict the tree's response over time--the release of growth further down correcting the lean, for starters. Residual risk after guying would be really low.

"and already have the next generation of trees growing beneath them is not being in the 'Paul Bunyan' mode that you are suggesting. It's good solid arboriculture.

If the client is totally freaked about the lean and can't live with it no matter that the assessor fully described the reduction pruning option and the guying option--simple matter to install, cheap over time--then yes. If the assessor was also freaked about the lean and could not describe residual risk after treatments, then no. This is why BC noted that the industry is moving toward assessment as an independent service--biz owners doing evaluations in the course of doing estimates are naturally and inevitably biased toward profit. That's where trust becomes an issue.

"Time may be running out but contrary to your belief, time is not running out for trees. I think you are wrong in your assertion that only large trees add value to a landscape."

Never said that, but who would argue that large trees add more? View attachment 205226


"Decisions about what is proper tree care should be independent of the consideration of an arborist future income."

Yes--and their present income too. :msp_wink:

" You've mentioned it often enough now that it is starting to sound more like 'milking the client'.

Pushing the removal option doesn't milk the clients--it BLEEDS them! More money up front, PLUS the loss of the asset HAS to be part of any honest calculation. compare those costs to pruning every 3-5 years and growing the asset. Yes you can call it "milking" the client, or more accurately milking the tree; an apt phrase, very different from bleeding them. like a cow being milked, the source of the income--the tree-- is maintained for the continuing benefit to the client, the community, and the business. Where is the downside to retain the trees? It makes economic AND ecological sense imo--there's rationality in that equation. 

In contrast, the removal option posted here is based on "likely--serious--serious--serious--in the process" assessments that are based not on the factors that BC describes but on pictures, and what seems like anxiety and fear, a fire-and-brimstone kind of religious approach. Note that BC has an opposite background--forestry vs. horticulture, and is on the opposite corner of the continent, yet is describing the same systematic process working for all concerned. That tends to indicate some validity to the TRACE approach. Let's let the client decide, after getting a qualified and objective view of the options. 

The TRACE course teaches that. It's been offered at least twice in easy driving range of the OP. 
Maybe next time?


----------



## lxt (Nov 1, 2011)

BC WetCoast said:


> One of the reasons the TRACE system was developed was to make the assessment process more objective and repeatable. In other words, whoever looks at the tree will come up with the same rating for the tree. In my experience, this is generally true. Different people may look at a tree slightly different but the rating may only differ a point or two.
> 
> I know there are people who don't accept my medical analogies, so let me try different ones. In the accounting world, there is GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) which guides how accountants report the financial information of a company. Think about how chaotic (more than it already is) the stock markets would be if every company did their financial reporting in a method of their own choosing?
> 
> ...


 

The TRACE system...........is & should be part of the CA/BMCA certification, but expand upon it if this area is in need of such! My complaint about Certs comes from the fact that in a free market any business is allowed to engage in a trade they wish as long as they meet all the criteria set forth by the state in which the Biz is located!

SOoooo where I am coming from is, if these Certs are "the standard" & will become a requirement..........then lets have the state incorporate them into a mandated license, provide testing, charge a fee & bam............case closed!! Not that I agree with what I just suggested, but.........for an entity (ISA/TCIA) to create Certs on top of Certs is crazy....revisiting the medical analogies & hell lets throw in other fields...........electricians, plumbers, pilots, etc.. they get their license & continue by followup education...their fields dont continually create "NEW" certs or licenses, yes things change...but those changes are put in the new codes, medical journals, licensing requirement changes, etc... do you see the difference here.........add on to what we already have making that credential even more sought after & respected!

As far as assessing a tree..........I am willing to bet that most on here could assess the tree properly, mabe using different techniques, but the conclusion would be very similar............if you think you can standardize tree risks.....look at the housing inspector market & the attempts at trying to do such there.........! (this is prolly the best analogy)

Funny even the field gurus: _Alberts, Pokorny & Johnson_ state all defective trees cannot be detected, corrected or eliminated!! the goal is to find 80% or more of the defective trees with each inspection.........& we havent even scratched the surface of that goal.

Im not against Certs, But with some of the people I know with them Im not entirely for em either!! Ill hold on to mine & hope for betterment............however, we cannot cross the line into a "save em all" attitude either, Seer has demnostrated just this with his replies in regards to the trees shown...........there are times when to prevent an enevitable hazard trees & other structures must be removed...........funny how the abandoned house will get condemed but may be structurally sound.....why? cause the hazards & risks outweigh the safety that is needed/required






LXT........................


----------



## treeseer (Nov 1, 2011)

" we cannot cross the line into a "save em all" attitude either, Seer has demnostrated just this with his replies in regards to the trees shown.."

Let's dispel that exaggerated line of BS. Here's a pic of a tree that needed to come down asap, and i told them so, even without a climbing inspection. this was one of two out of 28 that i condemned outright. Others will get advanced assessments, and removal may be strongly indicated as a reasonable option for some of the others. It all depends on owner goals, and objectives, and the assignment. 

lxt, what organ is used to determine that a "save em all" attitude is demnostrated in regards to pruning the trees shown? Pancreas, spleen, or colon? What method is it based on, the one you learned in 1972? :eek2: I agree with a lot of your potential future concerns about excessive governmental intrusion in the industry, but this thread shows that we are light-years away from that.


----------



## lxt (Nov 1, 2011)

treeseer said:


> " we cannot cross the line into a "save em all" attitude either, Seer has demnostrated just this with his replies in regards to the trees shown.."
> 
> Let's dispel that exaggerated line of BS. Here's a pic of a tree that needed to come down asap, and i told them so, even without a climbing inspection. this was one of two out of 28 that i condemned outright. Others will get advanced assessments, and removal may be strongly indicated as a reasonable option for some of the others. It all depends on owner goals, and objectives, and the assignment.
> 
> lxt, what organ is used to determine that a "save em all" attitude is demnostrated in regards to pruning the trees shown? Pancreas, spleen, or colon? What method is it based on, the one you learned in 1972? :eek2: I agree with a lot of your potential future concerns about excessive governmental intrusion in the industry, but this thread shows that we are light-years away from that.


 


Apparently the same organ you use to determine a standard of pruning for trees on a hillside............The BS is flowing more from your standpoint than mine............I present real topics & what is going on in our industry........apparently some are caught in giving Assessments & NOW....Advanced Assessments!! is there really an advanced assessement.....I guess that`ll cost a little more?? Thats a slippery slope right there...........now apparently we have assessments & advanced assessments, good luck explaining that as why a tree failed, _well your honor I just did a regular assessment, sure I saw the large dead limb over granmas room but that was for the advanced portion of which I was not hired to do...._


I am not advocating removal of trees for profit sake or for the sake of just doing it, But when I hear about/see tree(s) that have been assessed & hazards mitigated all the while other portions of structural compromise are left for the sake of adhering to the standard...........well NOW whats that all about? I post quoted literature from the industries leaders & you reply with the above!

excessive Govt intrusion..........? I think that happens when the trade/field becomes so overpopulated with fly by nighters & snakeoilsalesman that action is called for to regulate it! what I dont get is you keep ending posts with "this is basic stuff" but yet try to validate a cert with high tech verbality, it makes no sense! in the end it is common sense!!!

I think a certified tree care inspector would be a better Cert, then these individuals can go out before/after a tree contractor does the job & make sure the work was done to standard & if not? fine them a percentage for each violation, make this mandatory just like a building code inspector & then we might have something.......at least it would regulate the industry & make it more professional! drumming up certs is just confusing the public.....who most dont even know what a CA is.





LXT...............


----------



## BC WetCoast (Nov 2, 2011)

lxt said:


> The TRACE system...........is & should be part of the CA/BMCA certification, but expand upon it if this area is in need of such! My complaint about Certs comes from the fact that in a free market any business is allowed to engage in a trade they wish as long as they meet all the criteria set forth by the state in which the Biz is located!
> 
> SOoooo where I am coming from is, if these Certs are "the standard" & will become a requirement..........then lets have the state incorporate them into a mandated license, provide testing, charge a fee & bam............case closed!! Not that I agree with what I just suggested, but.........for an entity (ISA/TCIA) to create Certs on top of Certs is crazy....revisiting the medical analogies & hell lets throw in other fields...........electricians, plumbers, pilots, etc.. they get their license & continue by followup education...their fields dont continually create "NEW" certs or licenses, yes things change...but those changes are put in the new codes, medical journals, licensing requirement changes, etc... do you see the difference here.........add on to what we already have making that credential even more sought after & respected!
> 
> ...


 
I think what you are seeing is an evolutionary process with regards to certs. I suspect, but can't say for sure, that the people who originally conceived the ISA (and its ancestor organizations) couldn't get government support for the concept. Further, trying to get 50 states to agree on a common standard would be as rewarding as pushing a piece of string uphill.

For the most part, we have to remember that assessors are not decision makers. They provide the decision support and alternatives and it should be the goal of assessors to provide that support in as an objective (without bias) manner as possible.

When I'm talking to a customer, I'll explain why I think a tree should be removed or why it should stay and the indicators I use to determine whether a tree is hazardous or not.

I will recommend removals of trees that could be retained for a few years, but usually they are pioneer species (alder, poplar etc) nearing the end of their lifespan that provide little amenity to the property. In that situation, I'll argue that it is better to remove this tree now and replant a more suitable tree than to delay the inevitable. And I have done the opposite, that is delayed the inevitable because the tree provides amenity to the property. I think you have to analyze all the factors and present them in a logical manner to the decision maker (property owner). This is different from the "Yep, that trees got quite the lean - dangerous - got to take her out" (as you snap your suspenders).


----------



## lxt (Nov 2, 2011)

Yeah, but wont the certified "tree assessor" come off looking stupid when he has went through a "logical", "scientific" approach to determine a tree should be removed...............all the while the guy snappin his suspenders had already said that & it didnt cost a dime......!




LXT............


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 2, 2011)

You make a lot of good point's, LXT, . At the same time, it seem's you are fighting the inevitable. Me, I gave in to it. It is different for me because the company pay's for it. My CTSP cost the company but I did not pay anything. Not even for the Hotels and study material. I got my cert's because of the owner's support. But I see what you are saying, 
Jeff


----------



## lxt (Nov 3, 2011)

Thanks Jeff, what you just mention is a point in & of itself, if the company will pay/reimburse you then it becomes a "grab" all you can type of thing, but if you are a small tree care company obtaining all this will be a chore!

I just think that we have two organizations competing within a trade for market/certification dominance & this is why sooner or later the Govt or states will step in.......I know TCIA thinks keeping track of injuries & fatalities is a good thing...But when I receive an issue saying they cant fit all the accidents in there...then it tells me this industry has a problem somewhere

we have more deaths in this industry or related to it than, police & firefighters.......who regulates those industries? all these Certs are just putting us under a microscope for regulation beyond TCIA & ISA, to have a safety man on site is a very good thing....but to create a certification for a person who is basically following osha rules & having input on stricter company policy is a little over the top! I had to have an employee handbook with a written safety policy & receive Mandatory State audits......if my safety program doesnt muster the audit I get fined......! I have no CTSP Cert............its just following the rules of the state, if I want stricter rules & policy I incorporate them in the handbook!

Now as far as the other Certs, It is disheartening when I see/know of colleagues letting Certs go cause of "over" certification, feeling as though what they worked hard for is now to common & must be improved with additional Certs, when is enough.. enough? I think the intent is good but over done to a point of being somewhat ridiculous! keep the CA & BMCA & put within these certs the additional ones.....thats it! TCIA can keep the accredited gig & CTSP & thats it! anything beyond is for the money!

Education is good & most continue on with it if their serious.....but, does a guy who has been climbing & running an aerial lift for 18yrs really need a cert saying he is a climber specialist? aerial lift specialist?...............wouldnt LCTT or a CA be enough?

I dont know where its gonna go or end for that matter....But I know one thing, some bureaucrat will catch wind of these money making certs...............view the fatalities & injuries then we will see a state license "for safety sake" & all those certs will be nothing more than viewed as a guideline for licensing.............I think Mass. already does this if not mistaken? & their state Cert is hard to obtain.......






LXT................


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 7, 2011)

Sad to say I have to agree to some extent at least. However, most arborists do not use much common sense in assessing risk; rather, they are driven by fear and therefore take an overly conservative view. This often results in unnecessary tree work being performed at a cost to the tree owner.

Selling rationalized scientific approach is fairly straight forward. NASA can tell us the probability of getting hit by space junk is 1 in 3,320 and do nothing, so when the risk from most tree is far less than that the question is why do anything unless the risk of harm is significant. 

As for the "hazard hanging over the house", doesn't every tree part overhanging the roof pose some sort of hazard? I am not sure of the US figures but in Australia the likelihood of being killed by a tree falling on a house is about 1 in 200,000,000 or about 180 times less likely than dying falling from a bed (2004 figures).

The one concern that I have with many risk assessment programs is that they are mostly defect identification programs and have little to do with providing any real determination of the level and range of the risk. Risk assessment is therefore in many cases a misnomer.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 7, 2011)

Sad to say I have to agree to some extent at least. However, most arborists do not use much common sense in assessing risk; rather, they are driven by fear and therefore take an overly conservative view. This often results in unnecessary tree work being performed at a cost to the tree owner.[/QUOTE]

You sure did not use Any common sense with that broad based comment. 
Jeff


----------



## treeseer (Nov 7, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> ...The one concern that I have with many risk assessment programs is that they are mostly defect identification programs and have little to do with providing any real determination of the level and range of the risk. Risk assessment is therefore in many cases a misnomer.



True; it is really "defect" assessment, a witch hunt for weak spots, real or imagined.

Good observations on the state of assessment today; same in oz, California, or eastern USA. The upcoming BMP will have language about tree strength and adaptive growth; hard won, and essential to consider if competence and objectivity are claimed.

Trees stand up before they fall down. We need to see the strengths as well as the weaknesses, and also how they can be improved. Remember--every tree we see has stood up to everything thrown its way up til now.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 8, 2011)

treeseer said:


> Tr The upcoming BMP will have language about tree strength and adaptive growth; hard won, and essential to consider if competence and objectivity are claimed.
> 
> 
> > Whilst this is a step forward, as I understand it, this still uses non quantified terms so a high risk tree may provide a far lower risk than say stairs (1 in 310,000 in Australia -2004)


----------



## lxt (Nov 8, 2011)

I think we all need to ask ourselves: is tree risk assessment just a "best guess" of the trees health? Ive seen what are obviously bad trees make it through harsh climate conditions over what appear to be healthy trees, if the BMP`s will have the standard incorporated into it.....then it is just a matter of an already "CERTIFIED" or Non Certified individual to follow such!

It is not a matter of "trees stand up before they fall down" mentality, its a matter of when do we mitigate the risks involved (above or below), I imagine out east they`re not too worried about assessments...........nature threw more out than what could be handled, truth be told you can use the stair statistics, lightning stats or the lotto to try & bring in a rationale scenario.......but, what if this winter one of those trees on the hillside falls on the house? even if that doesnt happen............the growth rates will continue to "weight" the trees in the direction of the house (target).................from an insurance point of view & an Inspectors point of view the question would be................how could this accident have been prevented???? & what if the trees were trimmed & still fell...........then the question will be a little more in depth (liability?)

Now the bigger question: Do we really need a Certification to determine a trees risks?






LXT.................


----------



## treeclimber101 (Nov 8, 2011)

lxt said:


> I think we all need to ask ourselves: is tree risk assessment just a "best guess" of the trees health? Ive seen what are obviously bad trees make it through harsh climate conditions over what appear to be healthy trees, if the BMP`s will have the standard incorporated into it.....then it is just a matter of an already "CERTIFIED" or Non Certified individual to follow such!
> 
> It is not a matter of "trees stand up before they fall down" mentality, its a matter of when do we mitigate the risks involved (above or below), I imagine out east they`re not too worried about assessments...........nature threw more out than what could be handled, truth be told you can use the stair statistics, lightning stats or the lotto to try & bring in a rationale scenario.......but, what if this winter one of those trees on the hillside falls on the house? even if that doesnt happen............the growth rates will continue to "weight" the trees in the direction of the house (target).................from an insurance point of view & an Inspectors point of view the question would be................how could this accident have been prevented???? & what if the trees were trimmed & still fell...........then the question will be a little more in depth (liability?)
> 
> ...



ncredible thread and posts. I brought up the subject of Zevr's post to TRACE instructor BCMA Terry Flanagan a couple of weeks ago and he was a bit caught by surprise and unaware. So much of this subject has researchers scurrying around as we type I bet. Very interesting times.

Wulky's stuff, as usual.... very thought provoking. I just read Ansi A300 part 9 (2011) (Tree Risk/Structure Assessment) last night and was searching for this very kind of thread for those as interested as I am in this topic. 

At the seminar the entity of Tree Failure Data Base was invoked in discussion but not elaborated on. Wonder just how much input (shell wall thickness thresholds, species specific reaction wood/ woundwood competence, lean, species specific pathogens, etc. etc.) that findings of this data base has on where we are headed in....

....the evolution of the standard on quantifying the risk of trees that is currently in vogue....and at the end of the day, the report generated to protect targets (or at least give fore warning) from catastrophic events with our new knowledge/system. Seems to me it is way underused as mentioned above, while some look to carve their names in stone in history.

Hard to fathom but as I brought this subject up on another forum many of the resident meat heads were dramatically offended that someone other than them with the knowledge of the ages as td artiste s (read (cough while saying) "bbbulllschit"), and are armed and ready to fight any suggestion that they attend a seminar or crack a book or that anyone could be allowed to trump their unsystematic and unscientific opinion. lol. 
He's talking about you , ya know lol sounds like a poet and here he is a caveman go figure


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 8, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> ​_Sad to say I have to agree to some extent at least. However, most arborists do not use much common sense in assessing risk; rather, they are driven by fear and therefore take an overly conservative view. This often results in unnecessary tree work being performed at a cost to the tree owner_.
> 
> You sure did not use Any common sense with that broad based comment.
> Jeff



Jeff, you are right in saying I didn't use common sense and I accept that "common sense" is not common and is often flawed. 

In making my comments I used reason and statistics something that is absent in many so called risk assessments in the tree industry. By example, if we have a tree that has a hollow of say 75% of its radius that has formed slowly over the last few decades is this a defect? Yes! Is there an increased likelihood of failure? Perhaps not! If we look at Mattheck's graph we will see a number of trees that failed with 85% decay or more and these were once trees with 75% decay and obviously the transition to 85% decay or greater doesn't happen overnight. 

Because trees are continually self-optimising the rate of new growth and the rate of decay are both important factors in considering the significance of the t/R ratio. Other factors that are important are the height of the tree, the geometry of the tree, the surface area of the tree, the exposure of the tree, structures adjacent to the tree and so on.

Let us just assume that the tree with this defect is 10 times more likely to fail than the average tree, does that make this tree hazardous? Yes but this tree may not be hazardous enough to result in a risk that requires any action. What we need to know is “what is the risk from this tree?” We have identified a hazard and a hazard with an increased likelihood of failure but now we need to know how likely it is to cause a particular consequence. (Most risk calculations concerning people consider the risk of death).

So the question that we need to answer is how likely is this tree to fall when there is a person underneath who is likely to be hit and killed by the tree. It stands to reason that the risk of harm from trees in general is low with the annual risk of mortality from trees in most western countries being between 1 in 5,000,000 and 1 in 10,000,000 (in Australia it is approximately 1 in 8,000,000) it woul seem that the average tree poses a very small level of risk (UK figures suggest 1 in 10,000,000 for "trees in or adjacent to high public use"). 

If our particular tree, as a result of the defect, is 10 times more likely to fail than an average tree but is otherwise average it would have a 1 in 1,000,000 chance of killing someone. If resolving the problem with the tree is going to cost say $2,000 the question is doing this a prudent and reasonable use of resources? To save a single life from being killed by a tree like this would require $2,000 X 1,000,000 (the risk of the tree killing someone). This is a cost per life saved of $2,000,000,000. Is this reasonable or could this money been better spent elsewhere (like cancer research or traffic lights)? 

Yet, we as arborists often are out there saying this tree is hazardous, and is a "high risk". Yes compared with other trees it is a higher risk. Unfortunately the word "High" is relative and is in essence meaningless unless we can compare this risk in quantitative terms. Sure dealing with the tree may be a good paying job but it would be completely unnecessary and does nothing but serve to perpetuate the myth that trees are more dangerous than they actually are.

In my opinion, risk assessment without some form of probabilistic outcome is akin to having an election without a vote ... you get an outcome that is dependant solely on the perspective of the person that makes the decision, the decision may or may not be representative of any reality outside of that persons perspective, and the outcome is often used to validate the accuracy of the perspective.


----------



## Pelorus (Nov 8, 2011)

Trees don't read no textbooks.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 8, 2011)

There you go again. You paint with such a broad brush that it makes me wonder about your ethic's. 
Jeff


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 8, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> Trees don't read no textbooks.



Thank goodness for that! 

They do however behave with enough consistency that textbooks have been written on some of the most minute details about them. As with many things in arboriculture, there are many generalised rules with exceptions that seem to mock us.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 9, 2011)

Del_Corbin said:


> The tree Seer and I were discussing most likely wouldn't cause death unless a person were standing there when it went over. Now in the case of damaging the building.........the building is always standing there.



Good point. Because the building is stationay it cant move so it may get hit ( I am forever amazed at how many times trees missing the building or fail slowly and just rest gently on the roof.

When it comes to property damage we can probably be more objective. If the tree were to fail, how much damage on average would it cause. Let's say that a tree like this in this situation will on average cause $10,000 worth of damage and let’s say that the tree has a 1 in 1,000 chance of failing in the following year (if there were 1,000 identical trees 1 would fail in the following year). That means, on average, the tree will cause $10 worth of damage in the next year. 

In that situation what do you think would be sensible to spend avoiding an annual risk of $10? How about over the next 25 years? Perhaps $250. If it is going to cost $500 to remove the tree you would be better of investing the money or paying it off the mortgage 

Now you may be inclined to remove the tree for other reasons but spending $500 to remove a $10 a year loss is just plain dumb unless you are only paying 2% interest on your mortgage.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 9, 2011)

Del_Corbin said:


> The tree Seer and I were discussing most likely wouldn't cause death unless a person were standing there when it went over. Now in the case of damaging the building.........the building is always standing there.



Good point. Because the building is stationary it can’t move so it may get hit ( I am forever amazed at how many times trees missing the building or fail slowly and just rest gently on the roof.

When it comes to property damage we can probably be more objective. If the tree were to fail, how much damage on average would it cause. Let's say that a tree like this in this situation will on average cause $10,000 worth of damage and let’s say that the tree has a 1 in 1,000 chance of failing in the following year (if there were 1,000 identical trees 1 would fail in the following year). That means, on average, the tree will cause $10 worth of damage in the next year. 

In that situation what do you think would be sensible to spend avoiding an annual risk of $10? How about over the next 25 years? Perhaps $250. If it is going to cost $500 to remove the tree you would be better of investing the money or paying it off the mortgage 

Now you may be inclined to remove the tree for other reasons but spending $500 to remove a $10 a year loss is just plain dumb unless you are only paying 2% interest on your mortgage.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 9, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> There you go again. You paint with such a broad brush that it makes me wonder about your ethic's.
> Jeff



Would you like to explain ... Are you suggesting that trees can read?:msp_unsure:


----------



## ozzy42 (Nov 9, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> Good point. Because the building is stationay it cant move so it may get hit ( I am forever amazed at how many times trees missing the building or fail slowly and just rest gently on the roof.




You bring up a good point as far as the actual amount of damage actually done when trees fail.
People always want to remove the trees closest to the house when in reality it's the one a distance away that cause greater damage.Trees and limbs close to the house tend to [as you say] ''rest gently on the roof.''



> When it comes to property damage we can probably be more objective. If the tree were to fail, how much damage on average would it cause. Let's say that a tree like this in this situation will on average cause $10,000 worth of damage and let’s say that the tree has a 1 in 1,000 chance of failing in the following year (if there were 1,000 identical trees 1 would fail in the following year). That means, on average, the tree will cause $10 worth of damage in the next year.
> 
> In that situation what do you think would be sensible to spend avoiding an annual risk of $10? How about over the next 25 years? Perhaps $250. If it is going to cost $500 to remove the tree you would be better of investing the money or paying it off the mortgage
> 
> Now you may be inclined to remove the tree for other reasons but spending $500 to remove a $10 a year loss is just plain dumb unless you are only paying 2% interest on your mortgage.



Sorry but i disagree with you on this one.You used one form of math on the amount of damage to spread the risk:$10,000 down to $10.
But then compare the $500 to remove the risk to $10

No HO that I know have is going to have 1000 trees that may cause $10,000 damage to their home.

$500 compaired to the possibilty of $10,000 damage to one's largest single investment[their home] buys a lot of piece of mind.
Telling a HO that you can think of it as a $10 per year risk ain't going to cut it.


----------



## Pelorus (Nov 9, 2011)

"I believe the ability to accurately questimate the hazard that some trees present is being highly over estimated."

I very much enjoyed learning about rigging/vector forces from articles written the late Dr. Peter Donzelli, a name familiar to all here.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 9, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> "I believe the ability to accurately questimate the hazard that some trees present is being highly over estimated."
> 
> I very much enjoyed learning about rigging/vector forces from articles written the late Dr. Peter Donzelli, a name familiar to all here.



Yup, RIP Pete!!
Jeff

http://www.arboristsite.com/arboricultural-injuries-fatalities/24808-2.htm


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 10, 2011)

ozzy42 said:


> No HO that I know have is going to have 1000 trees that may cause $10,000 damage to their home.
> 
> $500 compaired to the possibilty of $10,000 damage to one's largest single investment[their home] buys a lot of piece of mind.
> Telling a HO that you can think of it as a $10 per year risk ain't going to cut it.



You miss the point. There is only one tree so this tree on average will do $10 worth of damage a year. Spending $500 to remove the small risk of damage makes little sense. I can invest $500 at 4% and make $20 a year. Better to spend money on insurance which they should realy do in any case and which will cover the damage caused by the tree and give far greater peace of mind since it covers many other issues such as fire, flood, wind damage, hail damage and so on. 

I am not sure what it is like in the US but in Australia pointing out that tree damage is only a minor risk to the insurer (so low they are not interested in the trees or their condition) and yet they are insuring their house for a few hundred a year should help them understand how low the risk is from tree damage. 

The fact that we find it hard to educate our clients shouldn’t be reason for us not to do our job properly or to provide our clients with accurate information. It is up to our clients to accept or ignore our advice it is, not our right to feed them crap because it is easier.


----------



## lxt (Nov 10, 2011)

lxt said:


> from an insurance point of view & an Inspectors point of view the question would be................how could this accident have been prevented???? & what if the trees were trimmed & still fell...........then the question will be a little more in depth (liability?)
> 
> Now the bigger question: Do we really need a Certification to determine a trees risks?
> LXT.................



Im thinking you have missed the point Corymbia, your figures work on paper..........but as with most things regarding nature, they just dont add up in the real world!!!

Ya see what is stated above is how it works over here in most instances, here....if my tree falls through your house, act of God & your insurance will foot the bill............so now lets focus on the reality of what was mentioned above!!!!


LXT.............


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 10, 2011)

lxt said:


> Im thinking you have missed the point Corymbia, your figures work on paper..........but as with most things regarding nature, they just dont add up in the real world!!!
> 
> Ya see what is stated above is how it works over here in most instances, here....if my tree falls through your house, act of God & your insurance will foot the bill............so now lets focus on the reality of what was mentioned above!!!!
> 
> ...



I am not sure how observable, quantified risk is anything but "real world". However I do take your point that some questions need to be answered and in particular the question you have raised.


_from an insurance point of view & an Inspectors point of view the question would be................how could this accident have been prevented???? & what if the trees were trimmed & still fell...........then the question will be a little more in depth (liability?)_​

The question that is likely to be asked is not what could be done to prevent the accident but rather was there any reasonably practicable solution available? We are not called to do anything or everything to reduce risk but rather that which is reasonably practicable. In this instance it could be easily argued that there wasn't a reasonably practicable solution since the cost of remedying the problem was disproportionate to the potential harm. 

Let’s get real world. So the tree has a lean but a severe storm comes through and blows a different tree down instead ... something we have all seen. Should we remove all trees? Obviously not! But don't all trees pose an element of risk? Sure they do but that risk is usually so small that we accept or ignore it particularly when we weigh the risk against the benefit we get from trees and the cost of cure.


_Many, if not most tree failures, occur during inclement weather. If parts with defects fail in the same condition that non-defective parts fail this is generally considered to indicate that these defects are no weaker than the non-defective tree parts that fail. If we can’t determine which non-defective parts will fail during inclement weather, then it may be appropriate not to be so concerned about many defects that fail during the same conditions. _ *Something to think about!*​

Perhaps I am a little odd but when I was pruning trees we use to guarantee our work against storm damage for the following 12 months after we pruned them, regardless of how severe the storm. The idea was suggested to me by a company that was doing it in the US. It took them a little time to convince me of the wisdom that trees seldom fail if they are not pruned and pruning further reduced the likelihood of failure. In the 15 years and having pruned over 15,000 trees we had one broken branch to repair.


----------



## lxt (Nov 11, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> I am not sure how observable, quantified risk is anything but "real world". However I do take your point that some questions need to be answered and in particular the question you have raised.
> 
> 
> _from an insurance point of view & an Inspectors point of view the question would be................how could this accident have been prevented???? & what if the trees were trimmed & still fell...........then the question will be a little more in depth (liability?)_​
> ...





Apparently you have never done Line Clearance work, I have gone through & trimmed entire circuits only to have a storm come through & find myself back there on an outage re-trimming/removing & the same can be said for the residential field as well, how many trees do you think failed out East that had some form of maintenance done on them prior to the storm?

Many good points..........But none that are showing the need for a Certified position!!!


LXT................


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 11, 2011)

lxt said:


> Many good points..........But none that are showing the need for a Certified position!!!



I agree, the is no NEED for a certified position but there is certainly a NEED for good training and a sound understanding of some potentially complex matters. Certification does not necessarily resolve all or any of the issues associated with risk assessment. For some certification will be about making a grab for work. For others it will be about doing as little as possible and hoping for a return, for others still it will be a part of an ongoing process to bring about excellence not just in themselves but also in their profession.

Certification does, however, offer a number of advantages. It ensures that those who are certified have at least been exposed to relevant information and training and it allows the public to be aware that they have been exposed to and hopefully benefited from the same. It also allows for some overall unified approach and concepts. It does not ensure that a risk assessment is carried out correctly or that an accurate and consistent appraisal of risk will be given ... that is up to the arborist concerned who, like you and I, are fallible and have their.

No system is perfect but that does not mean that we do not progress towards perfection and encourage and support those that take steps in that direction. If as a result I need to spend a few dollars each year and spend a few hours getting better educated so be it. I am not going to put any effort into resisting either of those, rather I would prefer to put my effort into improving my income and the income of my colleagues and at increasing my expertise and knowledge levels along with the increasing the knowledge of those whom I come into contact, colleagues and customers alike.


----------



## treeseer (Nov 11, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> If as a result I need to spend a few dollars each year and spend a few hours getting better educated so be it. I am not going to put any effort into resisting either of those, rather I would prefer to put my effort into improving my income and the income of my colleagues and at increasing my expertise and knowledge levels along with the increasing the knowledge of those whom I come into contact, colleagues and customers alike.



Sounds like a plan. 

If there is a concern about the amount of blood those money grubbers will be draining out of the struggling men and women out there, let's compare it to the BCMA. Cost to test is $450; that's $150/year, $12.50/month, 41 cents a day for the first 3 years. Not that painful, compared to other costs of doing business.

Renewal is $250/ 3 years, $83.33/year, ~$7/month, 23 cents a day. I have chronic anemia from leukemia, but don't notice that amount of blood pouring out from the wounds gouged by those cert-pushing money grubbers. :msp_rolleyes: I just renewed for the second time, because it does not cost, it PAYS, in the form of no-bid work, at higher rates, for starters. Certs have worked for me since 1992.

The CEU's required cost nothing or little, if you're somewhat enterprising about it. I just paid a couple hundred to get a fi####l at expo, and had a blast doing it, but you can stay in your town year around and get em in any number of ways. It seems reasonable to show you're learning something once in a while and staying somewhat current with the art and science and business of tree care.

Compare it to safety and gear--should we be happy with what we learned 20-30 years ago? 

LXT, since you are doing fine without it, what is there to complain about? Are you on a crusade to save tree guys 23 cents a day? :msp_w00t:

kinda funny the auto-editor here cut out #### from fi####l...

ozzy's pic following must figure in this...somewhere...looks like that tree mighta been topped...? re $10/day, depends on your deductible...


----------



## ozzy42 (Nov 11, 2011)

Here is some of that 10$ pr yr damage.


----------



## lxt (Nov 12, 2011)

Seer Im not complaining............Im just stating the painfully obvious: that Tree risk certification is a joke & completely un-necessary!

Furthering ones education.....totally agree & I see nothing wrong with making this part of an already sanctioned credential, but to continue to "create certs" is making this trade a joke.............look at all other trades, professions.....they dont have multiple certs like we do...........plumbers License..but hey how about flux application certification, certified soldering specialist, faucet repair specialist...........& on & on!!

according to you Seer...........hey why not make plumbers have all that, hell its only .23cents a day!! WHY? cause its a ####ing laughable joke & an insult to those holding Certifications that an entity keeps creating BS certs in addition to what we already have, take what we have & build on that.....................actually at this rate I could only hope the Govt would step in & provide a state arborist license................take your CEU test at home, pay your renewal & bingo.............no tree work can be done in any county through out the state unless the business has a state licensed arborist on staff!!! then we wouldnt need ISA & their BS created Certs.............Awe...thats right then no one would read those articles that you write..........what a relief it would be.

you want additional education that means something? go to college & get a horticulture/forestry degree & then add on to your major & get a degree in Geology......ya think the BMCA is better than all that? Not a chance!




LXT.....................


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 13, 2011)

Sorry missed these comments because you imbedded your response in the quote.



lxt said:


> Never had an insurance adjuster ask about a practical solution, if the trees down? LXT................



With risk we are not concerned about a practical solution but a practicable solution. Removing a tree that provides a number of benefits and that poses an very small risk, particularly when there are higher risks that could be abated withe the same resources risk may be practical but is not is not practicable



lxt said:


> Here is where you answer your own questions...........if all trees pose an element of risk & we already know this? Then that just makes a certification for such un-needed, cause we are assessing a risk that was already there. LXT................



The fact that we know that all trees pose a risk does not mean that we have any idea of what the level of risk is from any tree or that we have any idea about how to go about identifying a tree that has a level of risk that is unacceptable. 

Certification will not magically do this. It is only knowledge and skills that will do this. It is like flying a helicopter ... you don't need a licence (certificate) to fly one (ignoring legal requirements) but if I was going to pay for a helicopter ride I would want a certified pilot. Doesn't mean that he is more capable than the uncertified pilot just means that he has been prepared to provide some element of confidence by a third party that the pilot has such skills and knowlege.




lxt said:


> If you put this in to play then....hell, there really is no need for a tree risk assessment by a certified person cause weather healthy or defective it may or may not fail..............would be like selling the glass is half full or half empty, "yes ma`am your tree might have a limb fail....but then again the one in concern may be ok & another could fail" so what kinda tree risk are we selling? sounds like the kind that a home inspector would sell with all the disclaimers.........Why even bother? LXT................



Risk assessment is not about prediction, nor is it necessarily about precision. Risk assessment is about, as far as it is reasonably practicable, providing a reasoned determination of the risk using the available information. This is why we need to offer better training, so that arborists understand what they need to do, where, when, why and how. Certification is intended to give the consumer a degree of confidence.

It is hard to believe but sloppy and or incompetent risk assessments have recently cost one city in Australia $1,000,000 with only one tree to date being cut down. Look up Laman Street Figs.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 13, 2011)

lxt said:


> Seer Im not complaining............Im just stating the painfully obvious: that Tree risk certification is a joke & completely un-necessary!
> 
> Furthering ones education.....totally agree & I see nothing wrong with making this part of an already sanctioned credential, but to continue to "create certs" is making this trade a joke.............look at all other trades, professions.....they dont have multiple certs like we do...........plumbers License..but hey how about flux application certification, certified soldering specialist, faucet repair specialist...........& on & on!!
> 
> ...



They are all interesting points. Remember that certification is voluntary so you don't need to get certified. 

I agree that good education is the key element to moving forward. No one is compelled to get certified or trained for that matter but I have generally found that there are benefits to learning more, having my skills and knowledge assessed and in supporting industry initiatives such as certification. I became certified in 1990 and it was more than another 10 years before certification was even available in Australia. I personally believe that making money in the profession also means supporting initiatives developed by the industry and giving back to the profession.


----------



## lxt (Nov 13, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> They are all interesting points. Remember that certification is voluntary so you don't need to get certified.
> 
> I agree that good education is the key element to moving forward. No one is compelled to get certified or trained for that matter but I have generally found that there are benefits to learning more, having my skills and knowledge assessed and in supporting industry initiatives such as certification. I became certified in 1990 and it was more than another 10 years before certification was even available in Australia. I personally believe that making money in the profession also means supporting initiatives developed by the industry and giving back to the profession.





Certification is voluntary???? Funny how ISA & TCIA lobby to make it a requirement, I dont see it as voluntary when a job or contract requires it, so this particular part of the discussion is a point that can get a little hairy!!! why would any one make a Cert a requiremnt to obtain a job or a contract? who does this help? there is a deeper reason than "Voluntary" becomes "Mandatory".

I have to disagree on your last comment: making money in a profession means supporting & giving back to it............REALLY? Well let me see..........I am the one who entered the trade, went through the grueling apprenticeship, worked in all weather conditions, hung out over the lines to remove hang, helped out neighboring states in disaster relief.........Pay my taxes & oh so much more... I did all this to get skilled & become good at what I do, No "volunatary Certification" did any thing for me...except cost me!!

So....the give back to my profession is done by me working safe, providing jobs, continuing to educate myself & every now & then provide a free service to the community.............thats giving back...............Now what will the ISA do for me? drum up new certs, lobby utilities, govt agencies to try & make their voluntary cert a requirement for the job/contract all the while Seer wants us to believe it only costs .23 cents a day............what a jackwagon............his math is as bad as his articles, .23cents a day is $83.00 & sum change annually............he better recaculate!!!!! Renewal is just the begginning of the Cert process......theres a lil more to it than that!

Dont mind certs or a license..............BUT, lets build & better that path instead of creating stupid crap along the way!!!




LXT................


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 14, 2011)

lxt said:


> I have to disagree on your last comment: making money in a profession means supporting & giving back to it............REALLY? Well let me see..........I am the one who entered the trade, went through the grueling apprenticeship, worked in all weather conditions, hung out over the lines to remove hang, helped out neighboring states in disaster relief.........Pay my taxes & oh so much more... I did all this to get skilled & become good at what I do, No "volunatary Certification" did any thing for me...except cost me!!
> 
> So....the give back to my profession is done by me working safe, providing jobs, continuing to educate myself & every now & then provide a free service to the community.............thats giving back...............Now what will the ISA do for me? drum up new certs, lobby utilities, govt agencies to try & make their voluntary cert a requirement for the job/contract all the while Seer wants us to believe it only costs .23 cents a day............what a jackwagon............his math is as bad as his articles, .23cents a day is $83.00 & sum change annually............he better recaculate!!!!! Renewal is just the begginning of the Cert process......theres a lil more to it than that!
> LXT................



That is an interesting perspective and if you were climbing using 3 strand rope and a boson's chair, making flush cuts and painting them, then I might agree but there have been great steps forward in the last 50 years and these are the result of people in the profession often giving generously of their time and knowledge. This is a part of the education and growth of a profession. Voluntary Certification has resulted in improved standards and quality of work. This has benefited the profession as a whole.

Again if you believe the whole new certification thing is not working or doing anything you are free to opt out and save the $100 or so a year. I agree that it involves more than just money it requires time off and the cost of training as well. In Australia, Chartered Engineers are required to do 40 hours of ongoing study every year for each specialty they have, so for some that is 80 to 120 hours a year. Of course being a Chartered Engineer like being a Certified arborist does have its advantages … if it didn't you would just be ignoring this issue altogether.

You also need to be aware that the people who work for the ISA are not just screwing the system or earning a fortune. They are some of the nicest hardest working people that serve our profession.



lxt said:


> Dont mind certs or a license..............BUT, lets build & better that path instead of creating stupid crap along the way!!! LXT................



Whilst there are some strong adjectives I do believe that there is great merit in this comment and I believe that in time there will be improvements. Online education is one that I believe is very important and I know that this is becoming more readily available. Likewise, combining various certifications making particular upgrades mandatory and better tailoring related education and training are also important. It is easy to point out the problems with a T-Model Ford but without it the current face of mass produced and even custom built vehicles would not be the same. The same applies with certification. It is the best we have at the moment and unless there is constructive ideas it will not go forward. Likewise if the improvements are too quick or too early it may not get support ... just think about Ford's Edsel.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 14, 2011)

Hey Mark,
You bored?
Jeff 
I see the point LXT is making and I just say it is regional. 
I got nothing against you but you need to come to grips with who you are talking to.
Jeff


----------



## lxt (Nov 15, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> Hey Mark,
> You bored?
> Jeff
> I see the point LXT is making and I just say it is regional.
> ...



what are ya saying Jeff?......LOL

I am wondering if Corymbia is the same guy as "outtamytree", if so that would explain it!! Whats funny is all the defenders bring up 3-strand rope, flush cuts & other out dated practices.........but they forget that was the Norm back then, funny how there were less fatalities in our industry then compared to now.......uh? so I could argue that all the modern advancements in gear have created a less safe enviroment...........But that would be false......its the unskilled that have created these statistics & will continue to add too them untill something is done.

ISA..........hard working nice people, I agree!!! however they are also lobbyists & would like to be the "authority" in our industry as to who can or cant perform tree work by way of making their "voluntary" Certs a mandatory & possibly a legal requirement!

Its not the Opting out & saving money part that is the problem...........its the over creating of credentials that should be part of what certs are already there!!!! this is what I dont get with all you guys defending this?, Im not against an additional domain for certification but against a whole new cert in & of itself!

stranger yet......you mention education & growth of a profession, then tell me why the CA test no longer includes tree ID? yeah lets eliminate that & create another cert!! C`mon, lessen one cert to create another! & as far as the differences in giving back to a profession go, I guess I feel that I had to pay my dues, taxes & go through apprenticeship hell to get where Im at & now some entity thinks they should be able to "require" me to reach in my pocket to pay them????? they can lick where the dog cant reach!!

its bad enough that uncle sam keeps taking, health care is un-affordable, work is uncertain (unless a storm comes through) & Now there are some who feel that giving back is just par for the course by paying for un-necessary certifications.....heres a novel Idea:

How bout ISA make their CA requirement stricter? make people show proof of climbing exp or require those with less than 5yrs in the trade to undergo a skills test, put all these bogus certs under the CA designation & make sure people have a rudementary understanding of all these things..............maybe even put the tree ID section back in there? wow, imagine a CA needing to ID trees? So instead of watering down existing certs so that the masses can achieve such for money sake & creating a false sense of achievement leading to injury & fatality.....step it up & make it respectable again!!!!!!!!





LXT................


----------



## ClimbMIT (Nov 15, 2011)

Wow what a topic here? It's a shame some people like uh, I don't know (Treevet) has to put everyone down to make himself feel better. I am for certifications. Working on my AC for the state, (mandatory but not regulated) I have worked many years without one. I can understand where LXT is coming from. I was recently a professional firefighter and I have a book full of certs! Thank God I didnt have to pay for them but it did take time when i could have been working on the side. Educate the public about the importance of trees, make certain certifications like TRA optional, and let the customer decide what to do. Besides thats what will happen anyway. I prefer to trim a tree anyday over removal but I am not going to walk away from a job because the customer doesn't want to try and save a tree that is a nuissance on their property. I prefer pruning it's job security, 2nd good for the enviroment, and many other positive health benefits for people. I am going to get as many certs as I can, but I say we keep that a choice! That can also be a good selling point to our customers


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 15, 2011)

lxt said:


> what are ya saying Jeff?......LOL
> I am wondering if Corymbia is the same guy as "outtamytree", if so that would explain it!! Whats funny is all the defenders bring up 3-strand rope, flush cuts & other out dated practices.........but they forget that was the Norm back then, funny how there were less fatalities in our industry then compared to now.......uh? so I could argue that all the modern advancements in gear have created a less safe enviroment...........But that would be false......its the unskilled that have created these statistics & will continue to add too them untill something is done. LXT................



No I am Corymbia (Mark Hartley). Your point that this was the norm back then is precisely my point. We have moved forward as a result of the education and training offered in our professional and one of the major driving forces in this regard is the ISA and its members.



lxt said:


> ISA..........hard working nice people, I agree!!! however they are also lobbyists & would like to be the "authority" in our industry as to who can or cant perform tree work by way of making their "voluntary" Certs a mandatory & possibly a legal requirement! LXT................



I am not sure that the ISA have or engage the services of lobbyits. I could be wrong. Perhaps the move forward is a result of the profession and the larger government and commercial consumers pushing in that direction and I am not sure that expecting and working towards higher levels of professionalism is necessarily bad.



lxt said:


> Its not the Opting out & saving money part that is the problem...........its the over creating of credentials that should be part of what certs are already there!!!! this is what I dont get with all you guys defending this?, Im not against an additional domain for certification but against a whole new cert in & of itself!LXT................



I get that. Here in Australia it is not such an issue because more and more of our government regulations require arborists to be properly trained. On average it is now a training program over 3 year (about 40 days a year) plus on job training to be an arborist. The Diploma of Arboriculture requires about 1,200 of study and is likewise a prerequisite to providing many reports that are required. The impact has not hurt the profession rather it has been improving it. As everyone works to upgrade and continuously improve it has been transforming the profession.



lxt said:


> stranger yet......you mention education & growth of a profession, then tell me why the CA test no longer includes tree ID? yeah lets eliminate that & create another cert!! C`mon, lessen one cert to create another! & as far as the differences in giving back to a profession go, I guess I feel that I had to pay my dues, taxes & go through apprenticeship hell to get where Im at & now some entity thinks they should be able to "require" me to reach in my pocket to pay them????? they can lick where the dog cant reach!!LXT................



I do not sit on the certification committee so I cant tell you why ID is no longer in the CA test. I can say that you can probably be a great climber and do beautiful pruning work without being able to identify the tree that you are pruning. In addition I did my certification in Ca. Spent 2 days there learning the trees. Like many people I now work in an area where the trees are very different to those in my CA exam. As I have already said there is a clear need to undertake ongoing improvement in the way that training, education and certification are performed. 

Let me say again, no one is requiring you to reach into your pocket. You are only going to do that if you feel that there is a net advantage. If there is a net advantage then who cares.



lxt said:


> How bout ISA make their CA requirement stricter? make people show proof of climbing exp or require those with less than 5yrs in the trade to undergo a skills test, put all these bogus certs under the CA designation & make sure people have a rudementary understanding of all these things..............maybe even put the tree ID section back in there? wow, imagine a CA needing to ID trees? So instead of watering down existing certs so that the masses can achieve such for money sake & creating a false sense of achievement leading to injury & fatality.....step it up & make it respectable again!!!!!!!! LXT................



I agree, Certified Arborist to include everything in the BCMA ... hell just do the BCMA or go get a degree in Arboriculture ... Do you have your BCMA yet? I suspect not simply because there are not a lot out there who have a BCMA. You see you are already declining qualifications because they currently don't serve to be to your advantage.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 15, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> Hey Mark,
> You bored?
> Jeff
> I see the point LXT is making and I just say it is regional.
> ...



Yes Jeff, still on my back with my leg in the air. They say I wont be walking until next year

I get the differences and understand that many Americans find any form of governance somewhat unpleasant and over-governance completely abhorrent.

However, in spite of agreeing with LXT that Tree Identification should be in the certification exam, many trees are needlessly removed or destroyed each year because arborists struggle to understand and perform risk assessments on trees that are reasoned and scientifically based. I have no doubt that you and LXT get the deal but apart from making Risk Assessment mandatory and making all Certified Arborists do the upgrades. Can you imagine the outcry if you did this.


----------



## lxt (Nov 15, 2011)

No ones declining Certification!

I think if you & others want this trade to be recognized......then why not have it a degreed course through colleges? nurses go to college, plumbers/electricians go to trade schools, mechanics are ASE certified & go to school......so to use the analogies that you do in regards to this trade in comparison with others...then lets make a standard for such & stick to it!!!! not add at will

Again you miss the point........ISA & their Certifications are voluntary, however: many utilities, municipalities and such require a CA certification as a job requirement...........How did that happen? ya think Mr utility just woke up one day & said lets make our vegetation program require ISA CA`s to fill the position?......_its called grease the palms of those who can catapult your organization to a higher level_

You can argue that this trade has moved forward.......but check the fatality rate! in this regard it has moved backwards......so we call a round over a crown reduction, eliminate flush cuts & replace them with collar cuts & now dont paint the cuts it does nothing....! you can change terminology, change practices & make advancements in gear/equipment.....FOR NOW this is the best we can do, but in the future im sure our ways will be thought of as neanderthalic & mabe what we have come to think is good is really not so good!!! who knows?

Higher levels of professionalism dont come with Certifications/licenses or other...........it comes from responsible individuals who repetitively do the job day in & day out & know what works & does`nt..........not some standards committee of book schooled professors hoping to sell another version of "tree biology" or what have you!! 

Tree Id was no doubt removed because it presented a difficult domain....so remove it & make the test easier so any one can obtain certification, I would like the standards you have in Australia to become a CA, I dont want it easier....I want it harder...I took the exam awhile back after arguing with treeseer about it not being all that & I with limited study time (really didnt care) took the exam & passed it with an overall grade of 92%

That included the tree ID..........I was dissappointed in the fact the test was as easy as it was, but maybe thats cause I stay up on all the newest studies & read constantly, the BMCA I really dont even know how you go about taking cause of having to earn points in certain categories............I wouldnt mind studying & sitting that exam, it would be nice if there was a study guide for it!!!




LXT....................


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 15, 2011)

lxt said:


> No ones declining Certification!
> 
> I think if you & others want this trade to be recognized......then why not have it a degreed course through colleges? nurses go to college, plumbers/electricians go to trade schools, mechanics are ASE certified & go to school......so to use the analogies that you do in regards to this trade in comparison with others...then lets make a standard for such & stick to it!!!! not add at will LXT....................



I agree. I am currently working on my degree.



lxt said:


> Again you miss the point........ISA & their Certifications are voluntary, however: many utilities, municipalities and such require a CA certification as a job requirement...........How did that happen? ya think Mr utility just woke up one day & said lets make our vegetation program require ISA CA`s to fill the position?......_its called grease the palms of those who can catapult your organization to a higher level_ LXT....................



I understood that. So if you want the work along with the associated profits etc then you need to toe the line. As a result there is a financial incentive to getting the certification. Firstly a portion of the potential contractors will be eliminated because they are unwilling or more likely unable to comply and this is obviously an advantage for contractors that do comply. Seeing that everyone who does the work is in the same situation it impacts on the costing structure the same and as such the arborist is not disadvantaged and the utilities, municipalities etc get and pay for what they want. 



lxt said:


> You can argue that this trade has moved forward.......but check the fatality rate! in this regard it has moved backwards......so we call a round over a crown reduction, eliminate flush cuts & replace them with collar cuts & now dont paint the cuts it does nothing....! you can change terminology, change practices & make advancements in gear/equipment.....FOR NOW this is the best we can do, but in the future im sure our ways will be thought of as neanderthalic & mabe what we have come to think is good is really not so good!!! who knows? LXT....................



I agree, fatalities are still unacceptably high but the quality of tree care has improved markedly.



lxt said:


> Higher levels of professionalism dont come with Certifications/licenses or other...........it comes from responsible individuals who repetitively do the job day in & day out & know what works & does`nt..........not some standards committee of book schooled professors hoping to sell another version of "tree biology" or what have you!! LXT....................



I have to say this is in contradiction to the previous paragraph ... there are many individuals who are not responsible, who take risks, who use unsafe work practices and who know very little about trees.



lxt said:


> Tree Id was no doubt removed because it presented a difficult domain....so remove it & make the test easier so any one can obtain certification, I would like the standards you have in Australia to become a CA, I dont want it easier....I want it harder...I took the exam awhile back after arguing with treeseer about it not being all that & I with limited study time (really didnt care) took the exam & passed it with an overall grade of 92% LXT....................



Have a go at he BCMA. I know that when I did the certification exam 21 years ago I thought it wasn't as hard as it could/should be.



lxt said:


> That included the tree ID..........I was dissappointed in the fact the test was as easy as it was, but maybe thats cause I stay up on all the newest studies & read constantly, the BMCA I really dont even know how you go about taking cause of having to earn points in certain categories............I wouldnt mind studying & sitting that exam, it would be nice if there was a study guide for it!!! LXT....................



Lxt, the issue I have is not people like you and me who keep up to date, the issue I have is with those who don't and who, as a result, bring down the standards of the profession. As a result I cop the new qualifications. Just 3 years ago I went back and spent 18 months upgrading my qualifications only to have then made obsolete a few months ago so I have just gone back to upgrade the qualification again. I expect that others will say get stuffed and that is their choice but then they shouldn't be out there saying they have the same qualifications.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 15, 2011)

As long as the conversation is cool, I think LXT and Mark are kinda and kinda not on the same page. Because now I kinda see what Mark is saying.
Jeff


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 16, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> As long as the conversation is cool, I think LXT and Mark are kinda and kinda not on the same page. Because now I kinda see what Mark is saying.
> Jeff



I think we basically agree but we are both coming at it from a different direction. We both agree that training and skills are great and continuous improvement is important and we like the advantages that come from improving ourselves. We both agree that this or any other certification system is not ideal and we agree that something needs to be done to improve it. In a perfect world you would start again but it is not so easily done particularly when the certification program has been running for 25 years. In part, I think that is why the BCMA program was developed.


----------



## treeseer (Nov 16, 2011)

Briefly addressing some of the wild guesses above:

Tree ID was taken out because of regional differences, uneven availability of good images, and the inability to do it on a computer. It was replaced with taxonomy, how to ID plants by pattern of growth by using a key. Opposite/alternate and so on. (See December AN for more on that) More universal, more fair, is what i have heard.

I wrote 2 CEU articles 5+ years ago and had no others planned, so I ain't got a dog in that hunt of providing ed. materials. The BCMA does cost $83.33/year to maintain. Look at the list--I could get all needed CEU's for no extra $ spent.

There are more casualties reported now in part because there is more reporting.

The standards committees that I have seen (as a nonmember) have researchers yes but many more arborists from the field who give their time for their profession. No commercial bias that I could tell.

ISA does not lobby that I know of; TCIA does to some extent. One chapter that i know of spent big buckets on lobbying for a state, (NOT an ISA) cert, and it was largely wasted; a lesson that I hope will not be lost on others

The Risk Qualification is coming out because the new Risk BMP is ~100 pages of what will be very new material for those who have relied on obsolete training, instincts, and what they call common sense. The need for knowledge to be a bigger part of a more systematic and defendable TRA process has long been recognized. no I'm not an author of it but I will be a user!

LXT, you may want to check on the facts before ranting any more speculations--some are waaaay off. :taped:

Mark, hope the leg gets better--my shoulder gets cleared to climb by January, and the Geezers TCC.  Any 60+ climbers, cmon down and compete for the Uber-Geezer comp!


----------



## lxt (Nov 16, 2011)

Regional differences........thats ridiculous & just goes to show how watered down the Cert has become.....you & others compare our trade to nurses, electricians, plumbers...etc all the time............funny those trades go by the codes/med journal for that particular area, if you live in a certain region/chapter then you should now the trees in that location & be tested accordingly.

Casualities.......well seer you might want to check osha records/WC claims & the internal accident reporting systems @ the large companies......Cause I have worked & trained under the safety guy(s) @ Davey, Asplundh, Lewis, etc... & even they claim (using statistical data) that injuries & fatalities are more prevalent now than 10-15yrs ago.....kinda debunks your claims, maybe a lil more checking on the facts before you post?

Both entities Lobby........C`mon, I have been to chapter meetings & training sessions where the proctor has literally informed of what is on the horizon.........ISA & TCIA are in bed together & both make attempts through each others resources to gain a mandatory foothold in the work place of this trade by making Certs a "requirement".........why do you think they keep coming up with Certs? use your "commonsense"......ah thats right you need certification to replace it!! all the large companies have an in house climber training program (apprenticeship) they have aerial rescue & aerial lift training (certification) so why in the hell does ISA duplicate it when it already exists?..............Money!!

The committee you speak of for credentialing consists mostly of non climbing arborists with some field input that really never gets put into print, 100 pages of tree risk info & its all new...........I have to laugh at this........who wrote it? tell ya what when the author of that publication goes outta state, works the storm for 12-14hrs a day & is faced with risks of all sorts including electrical..........then that author/committee has a right to create a BMP.............other than that.........they`re opinion isnt worth the 100 pages of TP its written on!

The long & short of it is if you`re gonna try to make a Cert a requirement.....fine, but dont water it down to a point where everyone can obtain it, it should be of a professional standard & I think right now the standard is more on creating than on building, Ansi, BMP`s will always change..............*common sense if you have it usually gets better within a trade due to constant repetitive work that enlightens you about natures abilities, short comings & other tree related workings/dangers that exist, this is called experience & time is the teacher...............not a $10 book*


Build what we have, make it better & then you wont have to make it a requirement....it will just be sought after for what it is........."professional standard of the trade"



LXT................


----------



## lxt (Nov 16, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> I agree. I am currently working on my degree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




toe the line? thought thats what I was doing when I entered this trade & what I do everytime I go airborne, Financial incentive..........I literally make less now than I did years ago wage wise!!!! maybe in certain locations there is financial incentive but not here.............I wish there was though!

your statement of its a contradiction holds no merit as stated............I have seen CA`s who are just starting to climb that are dangerous as hell.............seen degree holders in forestry write work orders stating cherry tree & its an Oak, I think things are a little backwards dont you? lets get a Cert then learn to climb? Degree means nothing in this field & I have witnessed it first hand, worked beside a guy w/masters degree in landscape Arch & Horticulture.......his stupidity got him fired & many other degree holders whos ID skills are terrible, they`ve never climbed...etc... So its not a contradiction....its the witnessed truth.

some of the dumbest people I know have degrees!!! yes it goes both ways, but we expect the person with a degree to know better than the guy snapping his suspenders....................it just doent always work out that way, funny isnt it? 

you have heard the: "a degree in commonsense" & "experience is the best teacher" phrases? Now you know why!


LXT...............


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 16, 2011)

lxt said:


> ............I have seen CA`s who are just starting to climb that are dangerous as hell.............seen degree holders in forestry write work orders stating cherry tree & its an Oak, I think things are a little backwards dont you? lets get a Cert then learn to climb? Degree means nothing in this field & I have witnessed it first hand, worked beside a guy w/masters degree in landscape Arch & Horticulture.......his stupidity got him fired & many other degree holders whos ID skills are terrible, they`ve never climbed...etc... So its not a contradiction....its the witnessed truth.
> 
> some of the dumbest people I know have degrees!!! yes it goes both ways, but we expect the person with a degree to know better than the guy snapping his suspenders....................it just doent always work out that way, funny isnt it?
> 
> ...



I have to agree that a degree doesn't make you competent by default. Neither does experience resolve problems since practice does not make perfect ... it makes permanent. I believe as you do that the profession ideally needs to be about both theoretical and practical. There are a whole pile of guys out their doing tree work, perhaps myself included, who simply do not have enough of one or sometimes even both theory and practical skills.

LXT, life is not the way it is meant to be, it is not fair, it is not anywhere near ideal however arboriculture is a profession where grass roots guys and graduates need to work together rather than try and out trump each other and you know I say that sometimes finding it difficult to deal with the pontificating arrogance of some of the despots in the profession but even they have value to add to the profession.


----------



## lxt (Nov 16, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> I have to agree that a degree doesn't make you competent by default. Neither does experience resolve problems since practice does not make perfect ... it makes permanent.
> 
> LXT, life is not the way it is meant to be, it is not fair, it is not anywhere near ideal however arboriculture is a profession where grass roots guys and graduates need to work together rather than try and out trump each other .




Well practice doesnt make perfect........Hmmmm, maybe not, But I dont want the guy with just book knowledge doing my Heart surgery..........I want the guy with a 1000 surgeries under his belt who has seen the best & worse of things!! so practice will make you better!!

Life isnt fair...............but thats not the issue here.....the issue is certification!



LXT...............


----------



## treeseer (Nov 16, 2011)

We all agree that the the certification process would benefit from more field experience. As for the other half of the equation, verifiable experience through research is also needed. Here is <10% of what's in http://www.isa-arbor.com/education/resources/educ_Portal_Risk_Citations.pdf

Tree Risk Literature Review Bibliography
Last Modified: January 3, 2009
1. Abbott, R. and K. Miller. 1991. Utility tree damage claims. Arbor Age.
2. Abdollahi, K. et al. 2007. Gulf coastal urban forest hazard assessment and remote
sensing efforts after hurricanes Katrina and Rita. in Seventh Symposium on the Urban
Environment.
3. Achim, A. et al. 2005. Modeling the vulnerability of balsam fir forests to wind
damage. Forest Ecology and Management 204:37-52.
4. Adams, J. 2007. Dangerous trees? Arboricultural Journal 30:95-103.
5. Albers, J. and E. Hayes. 1993. How to detect, assess, and correct hazard trees in
recreational areas. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul, Minnesota.
6. Albrecht, W., K. Bethge, and C. Mattheck. 1995. Is lateral strength in trees controlled
by lateral mechanical stress? Journal of Arboriculture 21:83-87.
7. Allen, J. 1992. Trees and their response to wind: Mid Flandrian strong winds, Severn
Estuary and Inner Bristol Channel, Southwest Britain. Philosophical Transactions:
Biological Sciences 338:335-364.
8. Alméras, T., A. Thibaut, and J. Gril. 2005. Effect of circumferential heterogeneity of
wood maturation strain, modulus of elasticity and radial growth on the regulation of
stem orientation in trees. Trees - Structure and Function 19:457-467.
9. Amtmann, R. 1986. Dynamische Windbelastung von Nadelbäumen (Dynamic wind
load on coniferous trees). Forstl Forschungsber, Münch, Germany.
10. Ancelin, P., B. Courbaud, and T. Fourcaud. 2004. Development of an individual tree- based mechanical model to predict wind damage within forest stands. Forest Ecology
and Management 203:101-121
11. Anderson, L. 1988. Legal liability for defective trees in the United States. Landscape
and Urban Planning 15:173-94.
12. Anderson, L. and T. Eaton. 1986. Liability for damage caused by hazardous trees.
Journal of Arboriculture 12:189-195.
13. Andresen, J., T. Bartlett, and L. Burban. 1993. Protect your urban forest from wind
damage: Operation Tornado ReLeaf. Arboricultural Journal 17:227-286.
14. Angwin, P. 1990. Pest conditions and potential hazard trees in Chapman
Campground, Chapman Group Camp and Elk Wallow Campground, Sopris Ranger District, White River National Forest., Forest Pest Management Biological Evaluation, Rocky Mountain Region State & Private Forestry, USDA Forest Service.
15. Anselmi, A. and G. Bragaloni. 1992. A method to identify wood decay basidiomycetes by using enzymatic comparisons. Micologia Italiana 2:15–20.
16. Antonaroli, R. 2000. Wind damage to urban trees: The case of Formigine (Modena district). Sherwood-Foreste 6:11-14.
17. Archer, R. 1987. Growth stresses and strains in trees, Springer Series in Wood Science. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
18. Archer, R. 1987. On the origin of growth stresses in trees. Wood Science and Technology 21:139-154.
19. Asner, G. and G. Goldstein. 1997. Correlating stem biomechanical properties of Hawaiian canopy tees with hurricane wind damage. Biotropica 29:145-150.
20. Attia al Hagrey, S. 2007. Geophysical imaging of root-zone, trunk, and moisture heterogeneity. Journal of Experimental Botany 58:839-854.
21. Axmon, J. 2000. On detection of decay in growing Norway spruce via natural frequencies. Lund University, Sweden.
22. Axmon, J. and M. Hansson. 1999. Nondestructive Detection of Decay in Spruces Using Acoustic Signals: Evaluation of Circumferential Modes, Signal Processing Report SPR-45. Lund Institute of Technology, Lund University, Sweden.
23. Axmon, J., M. Hansson, and L. Sornmo. 2004. Experimental study on the possibility of detecting internal decay in standing Picea abies by blind impact response analysis. Forestry 77:179-192.
24. Axmon, J., M. Hansson, and L. Sörnmo. 2005. Partial modal analysis for health assessment of living trees. Lund University, Sweden.
25. Baker, C. 1995. The development of a theoretical model for the wind throw of plants. Journal of Theoretical Biology 175:335-372.
26. Baker, C. 1997. Measurements of the natural frequencies of trees. Journal of Experimental Botany 48:1125-1132.
27. Baker, C. and H. Bell. 1992. The aerodynamics of urban trees. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 44:2655-2666.
28. Bakken, S. 1986. Tree hazard control program: guidelines and standards for the California Department of Parks and Recreation. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, CA.
29. Bakken, S. 1995. Group-tree hazard analysis. Journal of Arboriculture 21:150-150.
30. Bakshi, B. 1964. Known and potential hazards from stem diseases - heart rots.
presented at the Symposium on Internationally Dangerous Forest Diseases and Insects
31. Ball, D. 2007. The evolution of risk assessment and risk management: a background
to the development of risk philosophy. Arboricultural Journal 30:105-112.
32. Ball, D. 2007. Why risk assessment needs an underpinning philosophy.
Arboricultural Journal 30:105-112.
33. Ball, D. 2007. I'll manage risk my way. Arboricultural Journal 30:121-125.
34. Barrett, D., D. Seaby, and I. Gourly. 1987. Portable compression strength meter; a
tool for the detection and quantification of decay in trees. Arboricultural Journal
11:313-322.
35. Barry, P. et al. 1993. How to evaluate and manage storm-damaged forest areas,
Management Bulletin RS-MB 64 (USDA Forest Service.
36. Barry, K., M. Hall, and C. Mohammed. 1995. The effect of time and site on incidence
and spread of pruning-related decay in plantation-grown Eucalyptus nitens. Canadian
Journal of Forestry Research. 35:495-502.
37. Barton, I. 1995. Preliminary results form a sailing pruning trial of Cupressus species,‖
New Zealand Tree Grower 16:28-29.
38. Baum, S. and F. Schwarze. 2002. Large-leaved lime (Tilia platyphyllos) has a low
ability to compartmentalize decay fungi via reaction zone formation. New Phytologist
154:481-490.
39. Beatty, S. 1982. Biological evaluation of hazard trees and dwarf mistletoe in six
summer home areas, Payson Ranger District, Tonto National Forest, Arizona, Forest Pest Management Report USDA Forest Service Southwest Region.
40. Bell, H. et al. 1991. Tree stability in Research for practical arboriculture, ed. S. Hodge, Forestry Commission Bulletin 97.
41. Bemmann, A. and L.. Klinger. 1993. Detection of decay within living trees,‖ Holz als Roh- und Werkstoff 51 (1993): 291-293.
42. Bertram, J. 1989. Size-dependent differential scaling in branches: the mechanical design of trees revisited. Trees - Structure and Function 3:241-253.
43. Bethge, K., C. Mattheck, and E. Hunger. 1996. Equipment for detection and evaluation of incipient decay in trees. Arboricultural Journal 20:13–37.
44. Birot, Y. and C. Gollier. 2001. Risk assessment, management and sharing in forestry with special emphasis on wind storms. presented at the 14th Convocation of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences (CAETS), Espoo, Finland.
45. Blackburn, P. and J. Petty. 1988. An assessment of the static and dynamic factors involved in wind throw. Forestry 61:29-43.
46. Blair, D. 1993. The Dynamics of urban tree hazard reduction. Arbor Age, June.
47. Blanchard, R. and T. Tattar. 1974. Electrical properties of wood in progressive stages
of discoloration and decay. Phytopathology 64:578-579.
48. Blanchette, R. and A. Biggs, eds. 1992. Defense mechanisms of woody plants against
fungi Springer, New York.
49. Boddy, L and A. Rayner. 1983. Origins of decay in living deciduous trees: the role of
moisture content and a re-appraisal of the expanded concept of tree decay. New
Phytologist 94:623-641.
50. Boddy, L and A. Rayner., 1984. Internal spread of fungi inoculated into attached oak
branches. New Phytologist 98:155-164.
51. Bond, J. 2006. Foundations of tree risk analysis: Use of the t/R ratio to evaluate trunk
failure potential. Arborist News 15(6):31-34.
52. Bonsen, K. 1993. Wetwood and its implications. Arboricultural Journal 17:61-67.
53. Borst, B. 1982. Trees and the law. Journal of Arboriculture 8:271-276.
54. Britton, J. 1990. Root crown examinations for disease and decay. Journal of
Arboriculture 16:V.
55. Bruchert, F and B. Gardiner. 2006. The effect of wind exposure on the tree aerial
architecture and biomechanics of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis, Pinaceae). American
J. Botany 93:1512-1521.
56. Brudi, E. 2001. Longitudinal prestresses in Tilia cordata and Acer pseudoplatanus.
MS Thesis, University of Aberdeen.
57. Brudi, E. 2002. Trees and statics: an introduction. Arborist News 11(4):28-33.
58. Brudi, E and P. Van Wassenaer. 2002. Trees and statics: nondestructive failure
analysis. in Tree structure and mechanics conference proceedings: how trees stand up and fall down, ed. E. Smiley and K. Coder. International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, IL.
59. Bucur, V. 2003. Nondestructive characterization and imaging of wood. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
60. Burdekin, D. 1979. Common decay fungi in broadleaved trees, Arboricultural Leaflet 5, Forestry Commission.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 19, 2011)

treeseer said:


> Tree ID was taken out because of regional differences, uneven availability of good images, and the inability to do it on a computer. It was replaced with taxonomy, how to ID plants by pattern of growth by using a key. Opposite/alternate and so on. (See December AN for more on that) More universal, more fair, is what i have heard.



That makes great sense. It is one thing to learn the name of a tree you work with regularly and another to determine the identity of a tree that you have never seen before.


----------



## treeseer (Nov 19, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> That makes great sense. It is one thing to learn the name of a tree you work with regularly and another to determine the identity of a tree that you have never seen before.



Absolutely; my brain gets lazy when 90% of the trees I deal with are 9 species. By using a key I can look for those subtle differences that can make a big difference in assessing, climbing, pruning--red elm vs. american elm or mocker nut vs, shell bark hickories, for instance.

IF there had been copious contributions of images from members, every region would have had enough to show well, and regional ID would have been on an even footing. But very few members contribute--it's takes more energy to complain, but that seems to be a more popular activity.

But even with a lot of images, regional ID would not be "fair" on an international basis. After a month with eucs--and corymbias-- in oz, I can only ID a dozen or so, and those without much certainty. Without using a key, I'd've been daunted by the 100s of myrtaceae species. :msp_razz:


----------



## sgreanbeans (Nov 19, 2011)

Good stuff here. I can see it from all sides, if there are really any sides. But this is good and very interesting.


----------



## lxt (Nov 19, 2011)

You have to be kidding me, I took the test when it had Tree ID & there were only 20 trees to ID...........perhaps if you are lazy 90% of the time & dont care to be able to ID trees......Cause "god forbid" its too hard......then you shouldnt call yourself an Arborist.

Can you imagine...........the plumber not knowing what kinda pipe, flux, flame is needed to do his job...........oh hell, electricians dont need to know circuit breakers or voltages & nurses.........well WTF, just poke em any where with the needle cause anatomy is not really something you should have to learn..............That is the absolute most STUPID excuse I have ever heard........& you wanna compare our trade to these???

I am literally appalled at what I have just read.......you guys would defend the necessity of a Cert to assess a trees risk & then would provide the de-balled donkey of an excuse like what I just read..........how laughable!

Yes ma`am Im an Arborist....Certified!!!, uh? No ma`am I cant tell you what kinda tree that is, but hey......would you like me to assess the risks your trees pose to you..........for instance, that one over there with the green leaves & doo hickeys on it, Um...thats got an inclusion thats split...........oh & that one with all the balls on it....

Go in & ask your mechanic if he can ID the motor in your car & if he says no..............ah just let em put whatever plugs & such in it...should run like a charm, funny how we expect the people in other trades to be knowledgeable & well rounded...but would lessen our trade by removing that which should be a basic requirement!!! 



LXT..................


----------



## lxt (Nov 19, 2011)

treeseer said:


> IF there had been copious contributions of images from members, every region would have had enough to show well, and regional ID would have been on an even footing. But very few members contribute--it's takes more energy to complain, but that seems to be a more popular activity.



Funny how I contribute every chance I get.....from voting to providing surveys & other such things....how rarely such even comes around to the members...........But hey, I got my ISA special holiday catalog with all the wonderful discounts.(yeah right) ya see...theres a little more focus on making money & selling materials than making sure that those wanting certification are "Properly" educated!!!



LXT..............


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 19, 2011)

lxt said:


> Funny how I contribute every chance I get.....from voting to providing surveys & other such things....how rarely such even comes around to the members.........*..But hey, I got my ISA special holiday catalog with all the wonderful discounts.*(yeah right) ya see...theres a little more focus on making money & selling materials than making sure that those wanting certification are "Properly" educated!!!
> 
> 
> 
> LXT..............



LOL!!
Jeff


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 19, 2011)

lxt said:


> You have to be kidding me, I took the test when it had Tree ID & there were only 20 trees to ID...........perhaps if you are lazy 90% of the time & dont care to be able to ID trees......Cause "god forbid" its too hard......then you shouldnt call yourself an Arborist.
> 
> Can you imagine...........the plumber not knowing what kinda pipe, flux, flame is needed to do his job...........oh hell, electricians dont need to know circuit breakers or voltages & nurses.........well WTF, just poke em any where with the needle cause anatomy is not really something you should have to learn..............That is the absolute most STUPID excuse I have ever heard........& you wanna compare our trade to these???
> 
> ...



LXT, you are a hard task master! Perhaps you should come down under and teach Tree ID

In my home region there are over 3,000 species of trees. Knowing them all or even many of them, in my opinion, is not important. Over time the local arborists get use to a few hundred of the more common trees. I can probably only do about 30-40% of the trees in my region. Not very good hey! I believe that what is important is being able to identify a tree when it is important. What makes matters worse LXT, is that I work elsewhere including 6 other countries so I know less than 10% of the trees I may be asked to identify and sometimes I even get the identification wrong. By your standards, I must be a pretty bad arborist. What I can do, however, is identify a tree as far as possible using a key and based on the identifying features present at the time.

Using your Mechanic as an example, there are often subtle changes in vehicles even within a model and a year. Most mechanics will not be able to detect the differences or know the precise model without popping the bonnet. Most know how to pop the bonnet but there are arborists who do not know how to identify a tree if it is new to them. I am sure that almost all arborists on this forum could tell the difference between an oak and a eucalypt. However, knowing what species of oak or eucalypt it is will require the ability to key out a specimen using taxonomical skills rather than just being able to recognise the trees. 

I agree that any arborist who has been working in an area for a while will get to know the trees they are working on but that does not make them good at identification. What makes a good arborist is one that knows when the identification of the tree is important to the decision making process. Take most arborists, myself included, out of their comfort zone and most they struggle to identify unknown trees. Knowing how to find and use an appropriate key when needed is far more valuable than learning the name of 20 or 50 local trees which is still a valuble skill.


----------



## lxt (Nov 21, 2011)

Hey, you guys are the ones using the analogies, I just find it funny that you do such & compare it to our trade.........If the Nurse doesnt know how many mmgrams to give....He/She asks or looks it up & errors on the side of caution. But apparently in the Tree trade we just omitt those things...............

To suggest that tree Id be ommitted cause there are so many species is just ridiculous........this is why some of the veterans of the CA credential are questioning "when is enough, enough" over 25,000 Arbs out there & as stated in Arborist News: many are Certified who have never, climbed, trimmed or even raked a yard they`re certified because their job required it!!!

If you got your most recent edition of Arb news...its in there! what they have self admitted is the problem...kinda goes with what I have been saying about voluntary becoming mandatory uhh? so tell me....How does the office worker even meet the criteria to become a C A anyway........what kinda field experience did he/she get to meet those requirements....here is a problem in & of itself, many are certified who never met or can meet the initial criteria to even sit the exam!!!!!!!

You can try to justify the removal of a domain by spinning the analogies to serve your needs.........if the mechanic ruins your car due to lack of knowledge or poor workmanship...........he is liable!!, if a tree trimmer tops a tree & cant ID the tree he is working in? well.....far less ramifications there uh? 

How can one be a consultant (internationally), how can one diagnose & provide remedy for anything tree related...........when the dumbass doesnt even know what tree species he is working on or being asked to work on? Thats just a laughable scenario.....No ones saying to know off by heart all tree species in the plant kingdom.............But c`mon.....you should atleast have the ability to know all the common major tree species & be able to determine the ID through a help aide!

Well now you can be a CA & : you dont have to climb, you dont have to prune, remove or work in a tree & better yet...you dont even need to know what kinda tree it is..............LMFAO, what a ####ing joke!!



LXT............................


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 21, 2011)

lxt said:


> Hey, you guys are the ones using the analogies, I just find it funny that you do such & compare it to our trade.........If the Nurse doesnt know how many mmgrams to give....He/She asks or looks it up & errors on the side of caution. But apparently in the Tree trade we just omitt those things...............
> 
> To suggest that tree Id be ommitted cause there are so many species is just ridiculous........this is why some of the veterans of the CA credential are questioning "when is enough, enough" over 25,000 Arbs out there & as stated in Arborist News: many are Certified who have never, climbed, trimmed or even raked a yard they`re certified because their job required it!!!
> 
> ...



If some one is topping a tree, the identity of the tree is probably not the issue of greatest concern. Testing plant identification is testing a person's memory and unfortunately it does not test their ability to identify an unknown tree. Perhaps I am oversimplifying but the times that identification is most critical relate to ecological and diagnostic (disease) issues, something that is not generally in the domain of the average CA. 

I agree that you can become a CA without being a tree climber. Many consultants, foremen, sales staff and so on have never climbed and whilst this means that there is a lack of depth, the fact that they have their CA means that they have demonstrated that an appropriate understanding of the required material. Sure, that does not mean that they can climb or even use a chainsaw but many CA's cant use a microscope ... just like climbing, it is simply a different skill set.

Mark


----------



## treeseer (Nov 21, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> the times that identification is most critical relate to ecological and diagnostic (disease) issues, something that is not generally in the domain of the average CA. ....many CA's cant use a microscope ... just like climbing, it is simply a different skill set.



=1. Non-climbers do miss a lot of depth, but so do climbers who lack other skills. Someone in a wheelchair can still be an arborist.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 21, 2011)

treeseer said:


> =1. Non-climbers do miss a lot of depth, but so do climbers who lack other skills. Someone in a wheelchair can still be an arborist.



I agree, many of our greats have not been climbers


----------



## lxt (Nov 22, 2011)

Once again the point gets missed...!

read the criteria one must meet to become a CA & then tell me how a guy who works for PennDot (road worker) can become a CA or better yet........the lady who has worked clerical for the utility the past 5yrs filing paperwork & doing inter office work now qualifies to sit the CA exam?

A proper understanding of the material means one should be a CA? cause thats what Im getting outta what you just said! I would bet that just about any student in the 9th thru 12th grade level in high school could take the CA exam & pass it............whats that say about our credential? I mean after all its just a "proper understanding of the material" see this is why our trade will not be recognized the way we want it........a wheel chaired person as an arborist? how about a color blind electrician? 

Ya see........there are no "Verified" qualifications to meet, any one with the ability to read can exaggerate about their experience, take the test & ...........well you get another unskilled CA Funny how now the analogies arent being used anymore.....lets see: nurses go to school take clinicals, have to pass boards, etc.. Plumbers/fitters take a weld test & pass state boards for licensing, mechanics must be ASE certified & have x # of hours hands on

why is it every other trade requires testing, class room hrs & Labs (hands on) except ours? truth be told & its in the numbers: *The level of qualifications/skill is less so that obtaining the Cert is easier to be had & by creating/lobbying for it to be a job pre-requisite or obtained after employment is given (mandatorily) the Cert then becomes a profit maker for the Org. * Cant dis-miss that!



LXT...............


----------



## lxt (Nov 22, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> If some one is topping a tree, the identity of the tree is probably not the issue of greatest concern. Testing plant identification is testing a person's memory and unfortunately it does not test their ability to identify an unknown tree. Perhaps I am oversimplifying but the times that identification is most critical relate to ecological and diagnostic (disease) issues, something that is not generally in the domain of the average CA.
> 
> I agree that you can become a CA without being a tree climber. Many consultants, foremen, sales staff and so on have never climbed and whilst this means that there is a lack of depth, the fact that they have their CA means that they have demonstrated that an appropriate understanding of the required material. Sure, that does not mean that they can climb or even use a chainsaw but many CA's cant use a microscope ... just like climbing, it is simply a different skill set.
> 
> Mark



Lets break this down! topping is an un acceptable practice....however, if it is going to be used I think tree ID is needed even more, what trees will take to such & potentially make it? would a white oak handle being topped as well a silver maple? some species you can get away with doing more to than others (bad or good)

We dont need to test a persons memory, we need to test their abilities!! all around abilities! I dont believe that one can have an appropriate understanding of the "Material" if they have never applied what the "Material" says, 

If what you say is true?, then many sections of study should be eliminated: why have a domain(s) on tree support & protection systems, tree selection, safety or climbing & working in trees.....?

I mean hell.........if you dont have to actually work in trees then safety regarding such is a moot point & if we dont have to work in trees then all practices associated with tree work should be eliminated....according to you two!

An Arborist(s) abilities/skills are to be applied to all aspects pertaining to tree care within its natural setting, The Microscope analogy takes things to a cellular level & beyond.............I dont think Lab time would be a bad thing for a CA..........however I think that is why they have a Horticulture/Biologist field...........ya know they`re the Doctors & we are the Nurses!!

So at one time those who advocated for a stricter rule set pertaining to the CA (even have a code of ethics) Now would advocate for the elimination of a basic principal that has been the staple of the Certification in the first place....Tree ID & on top of that lets create another Certification which by definition is presented or was in the study guide from the start! The rationale from you two is that of a staggering drunk...................It makes no sense!



LXT................I once argued against this cert & now argue for it & its standard to be raised....while others who once defended it now argue for the standard to be lessened..............go figure!!!


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 22, 2011)

lxt said:


> So at one time those who advocated for a stricter rule set pertaining to the CA (even have a code of ethics) Now would advocate for the elimination of a basic principal that has been the staple of the Certification in the first place....Tree ID & on top of that lets create another Certification which by definition is presented or was in the study guide from the start! The rationale from you two is that of a staggering drunk...................It makes no sense!
> 
> 
> 
> LXT................I once argued against this cert & now argue for it & its standard to be raised....while others who once defended it now argue for the standard to be lessened..............go figure!!!



I think perhaps I may have miscommunicated. I am not against raising the bar, I am not against higher standards. The CA program is what it is, complete with problems. Essentially if you pass the exam and maintain the CEUs then you meet the requirements regardless of what you do for a living. If you want something more challenging that sets you apart from the masses there is the BMCA or go get a degree. The CA is the lowest level of certification for arborists, not the upper end. It is like having a private pilots license ... you can fly and you need to keep recent but you may not have your night and instrument ratings and you are certainly not a 747 check captain.

As for the ID issue, I would rather have an arborist who can identify any unknown tree than an arborist that can recognise and name 100 trees. I believe that over time the first person will pick up and recognise more trees than the person who needs someone else to identify the trees but has good visual recognition and or memory skills.


----------



## lxt (Nov 22, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> I think perhaps I may have miscommunicated. I am not against raising the bar, I am not against higher standards. The CA program is what it is, complete with problems. Essentially if you pass the exam and maintain the CEUs then you meet the requirements
> 
> The CA is the lowest level of certification for arborists, not the upper end. It is like having a private pilots license ... you can fly and you need to keep recent but you may not have your night and instrument ratings and you are certainly not a 747 check captain.
> 
> As for the ID issue, I would rather have an arborist who can identify any unknown tree than an arborist that can recognise and name 100 trees. I believe that over time the first person will pick up and recognise more trees than the person who needs someone else to identify the trees but has good visual recognition and or memory skills.





Maybe Im mis-communicating? to become a CA there are requirements one must have before setting the exam........if you dont have em...you dont sit it till you do (this is problem #1) The CA has BECOME the lower level Certification over time! it use to be a very respected credential to have & was ISA`s proclaimed "Hallmark"

Its no were near like having a pilots license.........see key term there is License which is a state mandated requirement, Not a certification that will mean less tommorrow than it does today! wish every state did like Mass.

The ID issue is no issue.............if you cant atleast ID trees when apparently you dont have to be able to do any of the other functions associated with being an an Arborist then go do something else, cause "NOW" you dont have to work in a tree, you dont have to ID trees............then what is the meaning of the CERT to begin with?.....apparently just to be able to call yourself a CA!

I would ask you re-read some of my previous posts & touch on the key points within them!



LXT..................


----------



## Pelorus (Nov 22, 2011)

Former buddy of mine became ISA CA by virtue of working at a Club Link golf course for 6 or 7 months. 
Zero previous tree work experience/minimal knowledge.
Kinda cheapens the credential when a big corporation can fudge little details to circumvent prerequisites & nobody is the wiser.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 22, 2011)

lxt said:


> Maybe Im mis-communicating? to become a CA there are requirements one must have before setting the exam........if you dont have em...you dont sit it till you do (this is problem #1) The CA has BECOME the lower level Certification over time! it use to be a very respected credential to have & was ISA`s proclaimed "Hallmark"
> 
> Its no were near like having a pilots license.........see key term there is License which is a state mandated requirement, Not a certification that will mean less tommorrow than it does today! wish every state did like Mass.
> 
> ...



OH, 

I think I get your issue. There are people who are ignoring or scamming the prerequisite requirements. I agree, completely inappropriate. As certified arborists I believe that we have entered into an undertaking to report any such breaches.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 22, 2011)

Pelorus said:


> Former buddy of mine became ISA CA by virtue of working at a Club Link golf course for 6 or 7 months.
> Zero previous tree work experience/minimal knowledge.
> Kinda cheapens the credential when a big corporation can fudge little details to circumvent prerequisites & nobody is the wiser.



I am calling total BS on this. 
Jeff


----------



## sgreanbeans (Nov 23, 2011)

Have been wanting to chime in, but you guys are all over this! I think, that if you are a CA, you should be able to do all aspects of the job, while you shouldn't try and remember every single species, you had darn well better know the majority of them, in your region.
I think there should be field testing on the test. I don't think someone in a lab should get it, that's a botanist. I agree the test is too easy. I also think that these different certs are good, but feel that if you get your BCMA, then your done. No more needed, at that point, you should know all or know where to find the info. I know of several guys who studied the book over a winter, had little to no experience in the field, they passed. Recently I bid against them on a pin oak, I seen the written bid from them, they had it listed as a silver maple. 3 CA's did that! WTF? Tree ID is very important. They need to put it back. When a HO calls a CA, they expect that person to know all aspects or have a in depth knowledge of all the basics. Not a hot chick with high heels and her nails done, who has never been in a tree. I think that maybe the ISA made it a bit easier, so they could get more annual memberships, then hope that the hardcore go after all the other certs to separate themselves from the basic Arborist


----------



## treeseer (Nov 23, 2011)

I think we all agree the CA test, and the CEU criteria, should be strengthened.

Factcheck: ISA certs do NOT require membership. I know several CA's who lapsed their membership.
Maybe you 2 are confusing it with ASCA.

Like Jeff, I'm calling BS on 3 CA's not knowing a pin oak from a silver maple. There's something missing from that story--no offense, sg. 

And again, field testing and ID are not in the test because they cannot be taught or checked the same for everybody, so they would not be "fair". I don't like this either. If anyone here knows how to do that, they could run the whole show. It's done in oz but their cert is hugely expensive.


----------



## NCTREE (Nov 23, 2011)

I know CA's in the area that have never climbed a tree and yet run a large operating tree biz with untrained and unqualified tree workers who still top trees and don't understand how to make proper reduction cuts. This really pisses me off, how can you truely know a tree and all aspects of it if you've never been in one. 

I'm coming up on my 3 yr recertification in december. This really bugs me wether it's all worth it to be apart of anymore, the only thing I look forward too out of this whole deal is receiving the "arborist news" and the TCI magazine which I don't need and ISA cert to get anyways. I seem to just spend money in order to keep that little logo on my biz cards.


----------



## sgreanbeans (Nov 23, 2011)

treeseer said:


> Like Jeff, I'm calling BS on 3 CA's not knowing a pin oak from a silver maple. There's something missing from that story--no offense, sg.



None taken. I couldn't believe it either, until the HO showed me the bid, all 3 are at same company. Straight up, they said maple. Lady and her neighbors said the were wrong too, and then they dropped the "I am a CA" on them, still not believing that the tree she had planted some 40-50 years ago, all that time, it was not a oak, so she called me and one other CA who is pretty good, I was the last one to show. I dint get the job, other good dude did. But she said other good dude said same thing I did, something is wrong if they don't know. It could have been a case of them purposely telling her that, it was still warm, not time for the oaks, they might have been trying to get her to prune it then instead of waiting till winter, maybe that's why they were telling her it was a maple, so they could work. I dunno. 
My point to it is, they read a book, over and over, to prep for a test. With little or no experience, they passed. Now they are out doing that type of stuff. What do you think that lady thinks of the certification now. She had 5 CA's, 3 didn't know. Does not look good for the rest of us. Tree ID is important. The test needs to be harder

These are the same guys that I was talking about going to hardly anything but competitions, that gives them the belief that they know what they are doing. They passed a book test and can climb a tree fast, but they have no clue about the trees themselves, or how to care for them. They work very little, but I see their work, when they do it, they suck, even reported a topping they did to the ISA, but nothing happened. That's 3 annual memberships to them. So they are still out there, dropping bad knowledge every where they go, cheapening the title.

To them, the CA was nothing more than a piece of paper to get them work. We need the paper, but not guys like that. If the test had prac app, they would have never passed. On safety alone, they would have failed miserably. Also same guys that dropped a chunk from a crane onto one of them, breaking his leg. Instead of stopping, they continued, then they dropped a chunk on a roof. Didnt make it thru, but put a big hole on the top. They are champion hackers, but they are also CA's.


----------



## lxt (Nov 23, 2011)

treeseer said:


> I think we all agree the CA test, and the CEU criteria, should be strengthened.
> 
> Factcheck: ISA certs do NOT require membership. I know several CA's who lapsed their membership.
> Maybe you 2 are confusing it with ASCA.
> ...




Why call BS on it? I work for DRG consulting on First Energy property & have seen first hand certified & degreed people not know an Oak from a Maple, Had a BA call a norway maple an Ash!.........a Forester call a cherry a Maple!!!! how bout that?

I remember ACRT work planners mis-identifying trees all the time, I also know landscapers who have exageratted on the application form so they could sit the exam.........if they Lie to get the credential imagine what they do when they have it?

Last night I actually went through the BCMA requirements, 8 points needed & I qualify........however, do I take the exam & hope this is it? or will there be a BCMA II come out, ETC... I dont feel like wasting time & money on something that will be todays prize & tommorrows joke! Im really gonna have to give consideration to testing for it......cost is $450 Isa & chapter member or $550 for Isa member only, plus 60 CEU`s over 3 years satisfying certain categories

Sgreanbeans..........hit it right on!! Make the test matter even if it means less people have the credential, Id rather that be the case than everyone being able to get it............what does it really mean when anyone & everyone can obtain it, it loses its clout. Home owners barely if at all know about the Arborist credential let alone explaining to them BCMA, 

As far as The ID part goes................I say we revert back to the way the NAA tested, ahh...but that would mean a huge decline in certified Arbs (maybe even myself), would surely get rid of the non-climbers (yay) & would be a respected Cert once again........But I guess members, money & the want to monopolize have set the rules!

I wouldnt be surprised if another entity came out with a Cert process that would rival ISA & TCIA............maybe even be better, ya gotta admit they do have a monopoly on the tree cert program!!



LXT................


----------



## Pelorus (Nov 23, 2011)

Originally Posted by Pelorus

Former buddy of mine became ISA CA by virtue of working at a Club Link golf course for 6 or 7 months. 
Zero previous tree work experience/minimal knowledge.
Kinda cheapens the credential when a big corporation can fudge little details to circumvent prerequisites & nobody is the wiser.





Originally Posted by jefflovstrom

I am calling total BS on this. 
Jeff


Call it what you want, Jeff.
If anyone has access to the Ontario ISA chapter arhives, & looks back around 8 - 10 years ago, look for a Dave Al.......way listed who was from the Muskoka area. He never kept up his certification after the initial three years elapsed.

I have no reason to doubt what he told me.


----------



## treeseer (Nov 24, 2011)

or will there be a BCMA II come out,

After 7 years there is no sign of this


Make the test matter even if it means less people have the credential, Id rather that be the case than everyone being able to get it.........

Totally agree
If anyone gets in by fraud they should be outed

owners barely if at all know about the Arborist credential let alone explaining to them BCMA, 

in this market a lot know about CA and BCMA

... get rid of the non-climbers (yay) 

Yes all that can should get up there and see and touuch the trees but Discriminating against the disabled would not fly

, money & the want to monopolize have set the rules!
I wouldnt be surprised if another entity came out with a Cert process that would rival ISA & TCIA......gotta admit they do have a monopoly

2 have a monopoly? Ox E Moron alleging a conspiracy I#385 on this thread
there is a dictator dude in Australia trying just that
To little effect


----------



## lxt (Nov 24, 2011)

How many years was the CA cert the top of the pile? then came the BCMA...... so cant say it wont happen!!

Monopoly..........read the definition, you dont think ISA & TCIA have a foot hold in this market & are working together to keep it that way? 

Sorry handicapped people are limited in the trades......Dont care about color, religion, physical disorders, etc... If you cannot do it then you cant do it!!! sorry, you have these requirements to fill & if you cant...you dont get certified. Thats this countries problem...lets be politically correct to a point that it creates our own down fall........Look at the deficit....I can fix that in minutes: take away all politicians fringe benefits, make em pay for their health care & deductibles just like the rest of us, no free travel, communication, haircuts, etc.. 2 terms & go back to work in the private sector like what was suppose to happen & roll your pension over into a 401K like the rest of america so you can worry about losing money too

Ohhh & welfare is temporary & only for those who have worked & lost a job....not because some idiots keep having children...6 months of welfare & then you`re done, more than 2 kids....sorry, you havent worked in 10 yrs...oh well......Good Luck!

on top of all that BS, lets think about manufacturing stuff right here in the good ole USA................But NO.....lets be politically correct, screw those who work hard, EARN what they have & tax em to death!!!

Now rant is over.................If you cant do the job & meet the requirements......Sorry! Move ON





LXT...................


----------



## sgreanbeans (Nov 25, 2011)

Well............. I thought I had posted this before I left town, must not have hit the button.

My idea on how to fix the testing. Want the CA, first pass the written test, if you pass, then you become a certified member. I would have to believe that every chapter has a BCMA, You contact BCMA to proctor test. Test is scheduled every month at chapter HQ. Testee must provide own gear or arrange with BCMA. Testee must demonstrate to BCMA a set amount of line items, like soil, PHC, biology,rigging, climbing,saws, etc, basically, a bit form each subject from the written test. Tree ID is as easy as picking a big park and identifying as you walk thru, then explain what issues they have and how to move forward with any issues found. Set up rigging, but no cutting. Tie in and walk around, hitting certain points designated by BCMA. BCMA gets compensated for time, set fee via ISA. If you have to travel, so be it. Kids travel to get their degrees, we can too.
Want BCMA?, pass written exam, then go for prac app, also Proctored by BCMA, but board of them, say 3, if you don't have that many, video the prac app and send via the world wide web to other chapters, all agree that your good, then your good. BCMA'S get compensated for that as well. The testing may cost more, but still peanuts to a BA (believe me!got one in school now) I would have to believe that the BCMA's would be more than happy to help, I would think they would like to invest a little time in their own industry, to make sure we are getting good guys.
Tree ID is as simple as knowing what is in your state or region. That is fair, if you go to some other area, well grab a book and start studying. Besides ID'ing from the hip, 25 commons or so, then demonstrate how to find the ones you don't know. Via the books. You don't have to know them all, think that would be impossible, but you had better know the ones in your area. All others, you should know how to get the info.

Maybe I am wrong, I just don't think that it would be to hard. I am willing to pay more, if it means that the CA and BCMA have more weight and we get rid of the fakers and impostors. When and if I get the BCMA, which I am going for. I would be happy to do it.

The handicapped, sorry, choose to be a botanist or something of the same. If you were a CA and then handicapped, different story, once you have it, its yours. Cant travel to test, better get that figured out on your own. If BCMA agrees to come to your neck of woods, that would be on him. You maybe lucky and have one local. BTW, all BCMA's should be able to proctor prac app test's.

Altogether, you might have a few grand wrapped up in it. I just paid $2500 for a qtr for my son, 14 more times and he is done, again, a few thousand to get the good paper is peanuts compared to a university.


----------



## treeseer (Nov 25, 2011)

I like your thinking 
You need to talk to the cert committee

"
Altogether, you might have a few grand wrapped up in it. I just paid $2500 for a qtr for my son, 14 more times and he is done, again, a few thousand to get the good paper is peanuts compared to a university.[/QUOTE]

I feel your pain
Mine graduates next month
That puts the expense of certs in perspective


----------



## sgreanbeans (Nov 26, 2011)

treeseer said:


> I like your thinking
> You need to talk to the cert committee
> 
> "
> Altogether, you might have a few grand wrapped up in it. I just paid $2500 for a qtr for my son, 14 more times and he is done, again, a few thousand to get the good paper is peanuts compared to a university.



I feel your pain
Mine graduates next month
That puts the expense of certs in perspective[/QUOTE]

I don't think they would listen to me, it would be have to be someone with way more pull than me, IMO, to get to the right person, maybe you! I would, if they would listen. I know my place, so I would not want to bring something like that to them, unless I knew they were serous about it. 

Congrats on the kid, 1 going, 2 more to go JK, I live the way I do, to provide for them, if it causes me pain to make sure they have a better life than me, im good with that. Hopefully my youngest, gets a UFC title in a few years! Then he can pay for us! BOHAHAHAHAHA (Dr Evil laugh) My master plan!


----------



## treeman75 (Nov 26, 2011)

I live in a tristate area and im getting my cert through SD. Their cert is for three years and you need 18CEU's to keep your cert. They have workshops which John Ball teaches, he is on the board for the midwest ISA. The last workshop me and my main guy went to he encouraged me to get my ISA cert as well. I think around here customers will recognize a local state cert more than the ISA. I will probly get my ISA as well.


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 28, 2011)

treeseer said:


> or will there be a BCMA II come out,
> 
> After 7 years there is no sign of this



Well I hope that in time we may have an ISA University of Arboriculture



treeseer said:


> there is a dictator dude in Australia trying just that To little effect


 Tell me more. I am unaware of any person in authority in Australia trying to create a monopoly but there certainly are a few paranoid arborists here that believe that ever improving standards and qualifications are not good for the profession at least not good for them. I certainly feel challenged by the increasing standards of education here, but I think that is good. As has been pointed out, it is cheaper than getting a degree and I think I am better at my job as a result of learning more


----------



## jefflovstrom (Nov 28, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> Well I hope that in time we may have an ISA University of Arboriculture
> 
> Tell me more. I am unaware of any person in authority in Australia trying to create a monopoly



Ha ha ha!
Yeah, I am un-aware too!!!
Jeff :msp_razz:

He will probably ban me know--lol


----------



## Corymbia (Nov 28, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> Ha ha ha!
> Yeah, I am un-aware too!!!
> Jeff :msp_razz:
> 
> He will probably ban me know--lol



I don't consider a self appointed authority and leader of a new organisation that represents the burning desires of so many arborists throughout Australia (all 3 of them) as someone who wants to run a monopoly except a monopoly on self appreciation.


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 19, 2011)

*Certifications*

I read this entire thread today. Consequently, I did not get much work done. With Christmas in a few days, there isn't a whole lot of work to do; peole just don't want something else to deal with around the holidays. I see both side of this because I feel strongly both ways. I consider myself a professional with paper to back it up. I do land some high-end jobs that care, but the bulk of the work is low bid - sad, but true. Most of our clients do not know or care about ISA, TCIA, or any other letters. 

A little history: I started out as a lawn mower, then got into land scraping, and found myself doing tree work. I no longer climb, but the experience helps. I had no idea what ISA or CA was until the city arborist got me involved in some education (I think Ed Gilman was the guest speaker), which led down a nice path. Not long after I was certified, I received a call from a commercial outfit that needed a CA to work on a big oak tree. Without the certification, I would not have had the opportunity. Turns out, it was the state champ live oak for Alabama and the largest tree in Alabama. CA opens doors. I have a landscape designer with a degree in Landscape Architecture that has worked for me for several years. He recently sat for the exam and passed. He has never climbed or handled a saw. 

Does Certified Arborist = tree climber? No; there is another certification for that. But do people expect the CA to know about trees? Yes; of course they do. Unfortunately, like many of you... our typical call goes something like this: "We have a tree problem and need you to fix it." It may be dead limbs, a dead tree, a diseased tree, etc... I love getting the calls before there is a problem because we can do more for a tree with protection than you can by climbing it. I am not knocking climbing (pruning, inspection, etc...); it is needed, but often a prescription to a problem. Where we need to be going is preventive care. The people that are involved in this do not necessarily need to be climbers. We need people in the offices that know full well where trees' root systems are and what can be done to protect the trees, instead of tying a ribbon around it to "save" a tree. Look at where the tree problems come from: site developers, engineers, architects, landscape architects, designers, utility installers, irrigation installers, construction workers, landscape contractors, lawn maintenance crews, pesticide applicators, and even homewowners. I do not see a problem with more people obtaining certification, or at least education. At the same time, I agree the qualifications and test should be difficult enough to weed out the people that give us a bad reputation. 

I am not volunteering to assess the risk of someone's tree unless I am being paid to do so or there is a safety issue with putting a climber in it. Typical call: 
Caller: We have a tree problem
Office: Is it something you need advice, consultation, or inspection? Or where you looking for an estimate?

If the caller is looking for a professional to pay to look at the tree(s), they get me for a price. If the caller is looking for a free estimate, they get someone to give a free estimate. My guys know what to look for, but ultimately they are there to give a price on what the customer wants. If I go to give a free estimate, and the customer needs more info, I offer a consult (for a fee). I am not giving away advice or doing free hazard evaluations. If you need a price on removing the dead limbs, getting the limbs off the roof, or removing a 100 year old tree, here is your quote. If you need to talk about it or help making a decision on what to do, that will cost ya'. There is some gray area there, but we try to eliminate it. Think about this: If you have some pain in your side, you pay a doctor to look at you, even if that doctor can't tell you what is wrong, tells you nothing is wrong, or correctly identifies the problem. Point is, he gets paid regardless. Then, you might get referred to another doctor: same thing. If you need surgery, you pay to interview the surgeon. If you like him, you pay him to do the surgery. Why is it such a foreign concept to pay professionals for their services AND ADVICE? 

I welcome your responses, but remember... we are professionals, so let's make sure to act like it. :bang:


----------



## sgreanbeans (Dec 20, 2011)

Nice website. I see what your saying, but by definition a Arborist should be able to do all aspects of tree work. Climbing included. Doesn't mean they have to, but they should know how. I want to quit climbing (body is wrecked), but I cant. I would much rather work for a big show, like Jeff and do just consultations, sales and ops. But, I know that in a pinch, I could get back up there.
I agree with the call scenario, there is definitely gray areas there, and we all handle those differently. I get a call for a bid, get there, and they want me to walk the yard and give them a consultation on the spot for free. We have been trying to change this, but its not easy. We have lots of tree services that claim to be arbs, but are far from it, they will walk a yard for hours with a customer, filling them up with total BS, trying to sign the deal. That sets a bad precedence for the rest who bid, as they expect all to walk with them. I find my self explaining what the difference is between bids and a consultation. I then loose the job to a hack, who has the time to do a bs consultation for free. Spewing terms like topping and pruning bevels. Its not that I don't want to do them, I do, I want to get paid for them. I find that I will walk with them, let them know what needs to be done, then they tell the hack what they want done, based off what I told them, then they hire him because he is way cheaper then me. So I spent a little time with them for free. I am sure this happens to all of us, and it will never go away. I have begun to tell them, the minute that they start walking the yard, that if they want me to walk, they gotta pay, if they have me do the work, then it is free.


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 20, 2011)

*Tree Service Alabama*

I feel your pain. And there are lots of times I see things on the property or want to tell a client something, but they are not willing to pay me for my expert advice/opinion/consultation/inspection, so the tree suffers. And if I do give my feeling on a project, it always comes back to bite me in the bu++ because someone throws me under the bus for "blaming" them for something that was his fault (like the landscaper that planted the trees too deep and left the straps on or the plumber that trenched through the root system of the customer's prize tree). As I stated, having the ability to send someone else to do a free estimate helps tremendously. Customers try to buck the system by getting me to come out for an estimate, then trying to pick my brain or getting me to come out for a paid consult, then trying to get out of paying. Seriously, what is your tree worth? Are you really saving any money by trying to squeeze me or by favoring free advice from the suspender snapper (no offense)? Unfortunately, in this industry, if you can get a riding mower in the back of a pickup truck, people think you are an expert on everything outdoors: carpentry, fertilizer, pesticides, tree care, design, planting, roof repair... it is plain rediculous. 
Customer: My tree is sick. I want you to tell me what is wrong with it and what it will take to fix it.
Arborist: That is a consult, and it will cost you.
Customer: I am not willing to pay you to tell me about my tree. You should do that for free.
Arborist: You can either pay me for my expertise and I will provide a detailed plan of what needs to be done, some of which you can do yourself or have someone else do; or I will give you a free estimate for the work, but I will not tell you what we are going to do.

Of course that always goes over like pickled pigs feet at a suburban daycare, but I am not putting my self on the line for free to give solutions to their problem that they will have someone else do (the wrong way, I might add). But people are use to getting certain things free, like water in a drive-thru. When the restaurant tries to charge ten cents to cover the cost of the cup, employee, etc..., people get all upset. But they are fine to pay $2 for a bottled water. Most other professions, the professional is paid just for showing up (i.e. plumber, electrician, HVAC, and more). They get paid to diagnose the problem and give an estimate. If you want the work done, it is more. That's a beutiful system. Doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc... have the same system, except they don't come to you; you have to set an appointment, come to them, then wait (sometimes for very long times) to see someone, then pay them for seeing you. We (as a profession) are idiots. We drive huge trucks to the middle of nowhere, give free advice, put ourselves out their with liability, then give free estimates; and we don't get paid for any of it. That is insanity! And generally, we (as a profession) are willing to discount our work to the point of losing money just to stay busy. That is even crazier! But if we don't, some guy with a pickup and a lawnmower will beat our price and get the work. We really have to fix this. I am not sure what can be done, but we are fighting a losing battle. Again, take the doctor: he has people lined up in the lobby, many of which have the same appointment times (how is that even possible). Poeple come to him. He can see 50-100 people a day without going anywhere; and he gets paid for seeing each one of them, whether he helps or not. We, on the other hand, have to drive to each location, spend a rediculous amount of time with each customer, then allow enough time to get to the next appointment. If we are good, we might be able to see ten customers in a day, but the number is more realistically closer to three or four... and that is if all you are doing is selling. If you are trying to run a crew/business or do the work yourself, your time is limited even more. And we generally get paid nothing for that day of running around burning fuel. But how do we fix that? We can't bring our customers to us. If we tell them "Estimates are $XX," they just call the next guy that will do it for free. I don't have a solution... other than going to medical school.


----------



## lxt (Dec 20, 2011)

I dont entirely agree with the Arborist=tree climber=NO! response!

Not to be ignorant but what you have mentioned in your experience level just goes to prove a point that many have been making, How without working in tree care specifically can you even sit the CA exam?

I dont care if you mow a million lawns & trim a million shrubs with an entry level tree thrown in here & there.......the only way the cert will make an impact is if it in & of itself is regulated so that the criteria to be met is truly met!!! I know many who dont even meet the criteria to sit the exam.....but exaggerated to a point that they were allowed & now are a fella Arborist...CERTIFIED!!

The fact is this: if you lack the ability to perform at a *basic level *all aspects of tree care & think that book smarts will surfice then you should not be an Arborist.........call it politically incorrect but hey I dont want a one handed brain surgeon who is blind in one eye operating on me!!!! if this happened after the fact & he fulfilled an experience level that was satisfactory then I dont see a problem with him being in the room to give advice & consult......but to have never physically participated in what he is consulting on or just plain talking about................well thats just wrong!!

you question can best be answered by using the anology: does a doctor = a nurse= yes & much more!! does a nurse = an orderly = Yes & much more...........the point is for each of these professionals to get to where they are they had to do the same duties as those who are under them................But in tree care, why is it that many dont think this applies?





LXT............


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 20, 2011)

lxt said:


> I dont entirely agree with the Arborist=tree climber=NO! response!
> 
> Not to be ignorant but what you have mentioned in your experience level just goes to prove a point that many have been making, How without working in tree care specifically can you even sit the CA exam?
> 
> ...



Assuming that was directed to me, I don't mind answering it. I see your point. I think hands-on experience is irreplaceable. Just for the record, I do have hands-on experience... not just with landscaping, but with tree care too... even before I took the exam. My designer, on the other hand, did not have the hands-on experience, but he is making waves in "right plant, right place," nursery plant selection, proper planting specifications, etc... But I also understand that the CA cert is not just for tree climbers. Sure, it helps to understand that skill, but the arborist certification covers much more. And as I stated at least once already, there are sooooo many things we can do for trees that don't involve climbing. For example, planting... this is the bulk of the replacement tree problems come from (girdling roots, straps, depth, etc...). Protection - how about keeping a tree from being damaged? Personally, I would like to see arborist certification by nursery growers, designers, architects, engineers, landscapers, pest control services, contractors, tree protectors, inspectors, AND tree climbers. The power of the pen is great, and it is unrealistic to think an engineer would take a break to climb trees with a chainsaw to earn a certification that better enables him to protect trees from root damage or compaction.


----------



## lxt (Dec 20, 2011)

Chris Francis said:


> Assuming that was directed to me, I don't mind answering it. I see your point. I think hands-on experience is irreplaceable. Just for the record, I do have hands-on experience... not just with landscaping, but with tree care too... even before I took the exam. My designer, on the other hand, did not have the hands-on experience, but he is making waves in "right plant, right place," nursery plant selection, proper planting specifications, etc... But I also understand that the CA cert is not just for tree climbers. Sure, it helps to understand that skill, but the arborist certification covers much more. And as I stated at least once already, there are sooooo many things we can do for trees that don't involve climbing. For example, planting... this is the bulk of the replacement tree problems come from (girdling roots, straps, depth, etc...). Protection - how about keeping a tree from being damaged? Personally, I would like to see arborist certification by nursery growers, designers, architects, engineers, landscapers, pest control services, contractors, tree protectors, inspectors, AND tree climbers. The power of the pen is great, and it is unrealistic to think an engineer would take a break to climb trees with a chainsaw to earn a certification that better enables him to protect trees from root damage or compaction.




Well.......yes my comment/post was directed to you, However you really didnt answer the questions or prove your point, actually you proved my point............your "designer didnt have hands on experience" ya see here is the problem with the CA Cert!

what is your experience & does it meet the required criteria? you have already stated your designer really has no tree care experience...........But now he is certified? Lets re-visit what arborist certification covers & make that the base for the Cert!

yes, all you have mentioned is part of it.....just like the Doctor still needs to examine your urine/stool.........is that beyond him cause he is a doctor now? I guess by your statement pertaining to the engineer...........that those who reach the pinnacle of their profession shouldnt have to start at ground level??? I guess doctors should blow off the lab part of their training....no need to get their hands dirty, is this the mentality Now?????

Bottom line is: untill Arborists are degreed the certification is really an un-necessary, voluntary attempt at one bettering their knowledge base pertaining to their field along with hands on field experience aloft as well......! you think that engineer doesnt get called out & made to go 40 stories up cause his plans just dont work at that altitude & adjustments need made?

Ya see.........Tree climbers as you put it are the foundation & backbone of this industry, when it comes down to it a tree climber will be more sought out than a non-working/climbing arborist.............IMHO, any one with a turd for a brain can talk about something they`ve never done...................what happens when they need to show someone how to do it? ah thats right they gotta hire a tree climber.........plain & simple: if you cant climb or you dont meet the requirements to sit the exam....then you shouldnt be an Arborist!

I would bet 90% of the CA`s right now would fail the original NAA exam for the Arborist credential.....its just a watered down give us your money right to call yourself certified!

I think you should read the last line in the 1st paragraph on you website under tree care!!!! BTW, was the exam for the CA really what you made it out to be? cause I think a 9th grader could study for it & pass..........literally!!


LXT..............


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 20, 2011)

*ISA Certification*



lxt said:


> Well.......yes my comment/post was directed to you, However you really didnt answer the questions or prove your point, actually you proved my point............your "designer didnt have hands on experience" ya see here is the problem with the CA Cert!
> 
> what is your experience & does it meet the required criteria? you have already stated your designer really has no tree care experience...........But now he is certified? Lets re-visit what arborist certification covers & make that the base for the Cert!
> 
> ...



LXT,
You come across as abrasive. I am trying to contribute to the thread. I agree climbers are important; I just don't agree that it is or should be a requirement to become certified as an arborist. Now, to be certified as a Tree Worker - Climber Specialist, you have to climb; if you only have one arm or you are stuck in a wheelchair, you get no breaks... you have to climb. 

However, for the Arborist Certification, here is the application: 
http://www.isa-arbor.com/certification/resources/cert_Application_CertifiedArborist.pdf

From it:
_*Examination Eligibility Requirement*
The ISA Certification Board requires candidates to have a minimum of three years of full-time experience
in arboriculture. Acceptable experience includes the practical use of knowledge involved in
pruning, fertilization, installation and establishment, diagnosis and treatment of tree problems, cabling
and bracing, climbing, or other services that directly relate to arboriculture. Examples of experience
sources include, but are not limited to,
• tree care companies • utility personnel
• nursery personnel • instructors of arboriculture/horticulture
• landscape personnel • horticultural/extension advisors
• municipalities • consulting arborists
• state forestry personnel • pest control advisors/applicators
The eligibility requirement also may be satisfied with a two-year degree in arboriculture and two years
of practical experience or a four-year degree in a related field and one year of practical experience.
If you are self-employed or own your own company, you will be required to submit three letters of
references with your application._
---------------------------------------------
I went with the experience route. I am still a couple credits away from the 2-year degree that I haven't had time to finish. My 4-year degree is in an unrelated field. My designer went with the 4-yr (related field) degree/min. 1 year experience route. 

Althouth I could have qualified with landscape experience alone, I did have several years of tree business experience under my belt as well, which did include climbing for pruning and removal. I admit that before I knew better, I did some pretty nasty work, including heavy over-lifting and lion's-tailing. I cringe to think of some of the things I was paid to do to trees. I wish I had the training/knowledge/certification before doing tree work; that way I would have know what I was doing. 

From ISA's website:
Brochure on _Why Hire An Arborist_

Trees Are Good - Tree Care Information
_What Is a Certified Arborist? _

_An arborist by definition is an individual who is trained in the art and science of planting, caring for, and maintaining individual trees. ISA arborist certification is a nongovernmental, voluntary process by which individuals can document their base of knowledge. It operates without mandate of law and is an internal, self-regulating device administered by the International Society of Arboriculture. Certification provides a measurable assessment of an individual’s knowledge and competence required to provide proper tree care. 

Certification is not a measure of standards of practice. Certification can attest to the tree knowledge of an individual but cannot guarantee or ensure quality performance. 

Certified Arborists are individuals who have achieved a level of knowledge in the art and science of tree care through experience and by passing a comprehensive examination developed by some of the nation’s leading experts on tree care. Certified Arborists must also continue their education to maintain their certification. Therefore, they are more likely to be up to date on the latest techniques in arboriculture_--------------------------

The claim is never made that arborists are climbers. Although many are, not all are. The continuing education has been very important to me. My first years as a CA I had over 100 ceu's (125 to be exact), but I have since slacked off some. I probably still get about 50 per year though. 

What was the next question.... ah, yes... Do I think people should skip the ground level? Of course not. I think the CEO of the burger joint needs to know how to flip burgers. But, again... climbing is not a requirement for someone to grow trees, plant trees, design where they go, plan construction around them, etc... There is a perception in this country that "Tree services just cut trees - pruning or removal, but that's about it; and any cuts are harmful." I imagine that is true for many companies, but there is much more to tree care. Even those tree pruning cuts can be made in a way that helps the tree grow stronger structurally. But there are all the other things too - planting, inspection, root pruning, air excavation, pest control, fertilization, aerating, protection, and more. In general (and I know you will take offense to this, but think about it for a minute), a fence company can do more for a tree than a tree climber. I say this because often the pruning is reactionary to dead wood as a result of cut roots, compaction, and the like. A fence installed around the tree can prevent all those things from happening - at least during construction, when most of the damage occurs. For the same reason, a knowledgeable arborist can do more for the tree by protecting it than by pruning it. I am not downplaying the need of the climber; climbers are a necessary part of tree care, but so is the guy drawing the plans and the guy reading the soil sample. I am sure you think I forgot about all the great things climbers do, like reduction pruning, directional pruning, identifying things that cannot be seen from the ground or from a bucket, etc...(no one could list them all). I know climbers are important, but so are the other fields of arboriculture.


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 20, 2011)

lxt said:


> I think you should read the last line in the 1st paragraph on you website under tree care!!!! BTW, was the exam for the CA really what you made it out to be? cause I think a 9th grader could study for it & pass..........literally!!
> 
> 
> LXT..............




Last line, 1st paragraph of my website under Tree Service:

Arborists are knowledgeable about the needs of trees and are trained and equipped to provide proper care.

I stand by that. Again, proper tree care does not always mean "crank up the chainsaw."

As for the test, it comes straight from the study guide. You are probably correct. Anyone that could read and study would likely pass. I remember a lot of "best answer" questions though, where there were several good correct answers, but you had to choose the best one. When I took the exam though, the Tree ID part was still there. I am in south Alabama, and the test was in north Alabama, but the trees were from the region (yes, included many trees I have never seen nor will ever see again). I agree that plant ID is essential, but it does make sense that what is tested now is the ability to identify, not memorization.


----------



## lxt (Dec 20, 2011)

Chris, not meaning to be abrasive, just wanting the cert to have meaning! I am well aware of the requirements & honestly find it somewhat laughable that a person @ the Lowes nursery section can become a CA!

the original exam was very difficult & encompassed all aspects from ID to skills testing........this version we have now is very rudemenatry, even the BCMA test wouldnt even compare to the original CA test.

I know ISA has created additional certs, But..............Really!!!! how could someone do a canopy inspection without climbing? how are ya gonna cable & brace that prize maple in granmas back yard, how are you gonna install a lightening protection system & etc.. without the ability to climb? even the topic of this thread "tree risk assessment certification"..... guess when doing cavity inspections to determine structural stability the non climbing arb has to rely on the climber....... & that is exactly what happened where Im at untill I showed up!!

I know where you`re coming from & some on here will back you in & of the fact that they cant & never could climb, but make a living consulting from the ground or sending a Sub (contract climber ) up to do the work for em, The consulting project im on Now has gone through over a dozen Certified Arborists cause they cant climb, when I told the enviromental specialist I`ll climb up & check it out........................he damn neer fell over, I told him "Im not as fast after the surgery, but give me time!"

He just couldnt get over it.....................told me most of you guys come out here & dont leave the ground, when i ask for Pics aloft or samples from a certain section of the tree...............they just looked at me & said we`ll need to bring in a climber!!! Im this guys favorite man just cause I can climb & im a CA........along with many other Certs & Licenses!!

So the long & short of it is: in order to be a respected Arborist, it would be better if one had the ability or has the ability to climb the tree in which they`re providing care for & if they dont? then No Arborist Cert for you!!! JMHO

Can you imagine the mechanic @ the dealership telling you "id fix it if I had the tools" or the Doctor telling ya "id give ya medicine if I could write the RX" or the plumber....well you get the idea!

LXT...............


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 20, 2011)

lxt said:


> Chris, not meaning to be abrasive, just wanting the cert to have meaning! I am well aware of the requirements & honestly find it somewhat laughable that a person @ the Lowes nursery section can become a CA!
> 
> the original exam was very difficult & encompassed all aspects from ID to skills testing........this version we have now is very rudemenatry, even the BCMA test wouldnt even compare to the original CA test.
> 
> ...



Agree! Very well said. Having that skill set can open many more doors and could provide better care for the trees. Where I am, I can climb if need be. Our bucket will access most of what I need to get to for inspection, but I also have 2 climbers on staff that can climb anywhere I want them to.


----------



## Arborleaf13 (Dec 22, 2011)

*Trace*

Is trace a recommended skill to participate in?

:smile2:


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 22, 2011)

Del_Corbin said:


> Do the climbers take detailed photos so you can analyze from the ground?




View attachment 212767


Tool #29 - Kim Coder - Tree Structural Risk Assessment

Again, tree climbers are important, but the bulk of the risk assessment issues are at the base. The issues out in the canopy are generally minimal and don't cause entire tree failures. 

http://www.warnell.uga.edu/outreach/pubs/pdf/forestry/Development Assessment Tools Pub10-24.pdf


----------



## lxt (Dec 22, 2011)

I agree, base rot or root issues are pretty much apparent when viewing, if we are really trying to determine structural integrity then the use of a resistograph or other means should be used, co-dom stems, included bark & other issues are generally spotted from the ground............But are needing remedied aloft!!!!

I have to dis agree with the statement about issues out in the canopy are minimal......the project im currently working on requires end tip samples & bark samples along with any noticeable other problems...which can be an enormous undertaking!

these canopy issues usually lead to systemic problems & ultimately tree failure & what Del is talking about above! This is why being a climber is important......even if not certified the climber will gain insight as to the symptom, cause & cure methods involved, a climber on the project where Im at is much more desirable that being just a CA on the ground!!!



LXT.............


----------



## Corymbia (Dec 28, 2011)

Del_Corbin said:


> I see more trees with large fallen limbs than I do whole tree failures. A good percentage of the time problems at the base are evident to even the most casual observer.



Indeed that is a valid observation. Yet in spite of this, in Australia and I suspect in the US as well, branch failures result in fewer fatalities than stem failures. The reason is to do with the size of the part and the mode and timing of the failures.

Risk assessment, amongst other things, is about being reasonably practicable. If it takes me, for example, 5 minutes to assess a tree from the ground but 30 minutes to assess it aerially, I would need to get 6 times the benefit in risk management from the aerial inspection. When it comes to risk, this is generally not the case. Knowing when an aerial inspection is appropriate and required is more important than being able to perform one. If you can't climb or choose not to climb, knowing a suitably qualified and experienced climber would make good sense.


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 28, 2011)

Having the ability to climb is great, just not essential to being an arborist or risk assessor. Sure it is desirable, but not required.


----------



## Corymbia (Dec 28, 2011)

Chris Francis said:


> Having the ability to climb is great, just not essential to being an arborist or risk assessor. Sure it is desirable, but not required.



Chris, I think even desirable is perhaps too strong. "Sometimes useful" is perhaps a more appropriate descriptor.


----------



## lxt (Dec 28, 2011)

*If you cant climb............you shouldnt be an Arborist*!!! "desirable" & "sometimes useful" What a joke these statements are, C`mon! you guys keep thinking that & when you need a climber & he wants top dollar...? its because a select few entered this trade that shouldnt have & need a CLIMBER!!!

Tell ya what, I will always be chosen over a non-climbing CA or non-climbing BCMA for purposes of enviromental consultation, vegetation analysis, field data collection, etc... cause a bunch of lazy arses with a Cert that an 8th grader could obtain think they are to good to climb........or truth be told....just dont have the ability & manhood to! & thinking that climbing is "desirable" & "sometimes useful" is just what got them *FIRED*......So yep Ill step in & take that "desirable" money they`ll be missing along with the crappy reference they get when applying elsewhere!!



LXT............


----------



## lxt (Dec 28, 2011)

Corymbia said:


> Knowing when an aerial inspection is appropriate and required is more important than being able to perform one. If you can't climb or choose not to climb, knowing a suitably qualified and experienced climber would make good sense.



WTF kinda oxymoronic phrase this is?? * knowing when is more important than being able to perform one* Really? so let me see if I got this?

yes ma`am your tree needs an aerial inspection, _well how do you know?_ cause im a tree risk assessor "certified", _ohh my...so are you gonna go take a look at it?_ Well no Ma`am......im gonna bring in a climber on your dime cause I cant climb or just plain dont want to!......trust me ma`am this just makes good sense, *her final reply* _I think ill get a second opinion from someone who really knows what they`re doing_

Good sense uh? & just who foots the bill cause the Certified Idiot doesnt have the skills to perform what he has diagnosed? cause in the ole USA..............that dont go over to well....! 



LXT............


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 28, 2011)

Serious question: Out of 100 trees being assessed for risk, how many require an aerial inspection? For me, that number is very low... single digits. And of the ones I do believe warrant an aerial inspection, I can generally get to the area with a bucket truck or ladder. Off the top of my head: epithetic growth (I always know what this means, I'm just not sure of the extent of the decay), cables, insect damage, flat spot, crack, "something doesn't look right," etc... Even then, we are already doing work in the tree (pruning structurally, pruning to remove dead limbs, adjusting cables, etc..., so it is not a big deal to take a look or a sample while we are there. Did I mention we can get to most everywhere without climbing? But as I said, when an aerial inspection is warranted, my climber is typically going to be in the tree anyway (bucket or monkey). While my guys are swinging around, I can go talk to the next customer, be on another job, or tackle some more government paperwork. There are only so many hours in the day. Most of what I see is co-dom or man-made. 
"Yes m'am, the plumber cut through all the roots 4 feet away from the trunk. This makes the tree much more likely to fail in this direction. The tip dieback you see is a result of the injury and will worsen with time. The tree will also hollow out over time, but the biggest concern for me right now is the structural defect below ground. And, oh yeah, you need an aerial inspection!"


----------



## jefflovstrom (Dec 28, 2011)

Chris Francis said:


> Serious question: Out of 100 trees being assessed for risk, how many require an aerial inspection? For me, that number is very low... single digits. And of the ones I do believe warrant an aerial inspection, I can generally get to the area with a bucket truck or ladder. Off the top of my head: epithetic growth (I always know what this means, I'm just not sure of the extent of the decay), cables, insect damage, flat spot, crack, "something doesn't look right," etc... Even then, we are already doing work in the tree (pruning structurally, pruning to remove dead limbs, adjusting cables, etc..., so it is not a big deal to take a look or a sample while we are there. Did I mention we can get to most everywhere without climbing? But as I said, when an aerial inspection is warranted, my climber is typically going to be in the tree anyway (bucket or monkey). While my guys are swinging around, I can go talk to the next customer, be on another job, or tackle some more government paperwork. There are only so many hours in the day. Most of what I see is co-dom or man-made.
> "Yes m'am, the plumber cut through all the roots 4 feet away from the trunk. This makes the tree much more likely to fail in this direction. The tip dieback you see is a result of the injury and will worsen with time. The tree will also hollow out over time, but the biggest concern for me right now is the structural defect below ground. And, oh yeah, you need an aerial inspection!"



OK, I will bite1
How about a row of eucalyptus sideroxylon;s along the back row that have been topped for year's at the back of a hotel with a view?
Jeff


----------



## treesandsurf (Dec 29, 2011)

good discussion regarding the ca cert and climbing. It's frustrating when you've developed a craft (climbing) which is challenging/rewarding/demanding/difficult/hard work and takes a lot of time to hone and part of the recognition for the honing of this craft is lumped into a big CA certification which doesn't even recognize it as a valuable or important skillset for the practicing arborist?? What it does recognize is a lower level certification (CTW) that is considered entry level in this profession with the psychology being that it is one step to move on from.... But a real climber/arborist doesn't 'move on' from the most fundamental core of this profession, unless of course they are forced to. 

That's where you start from, then the next slap is that the "expert" in all things trees will most likely never have touched a tree above ten feet or if he/she has it was a guided tour and then has often looked down the nose at the tree climbing grunts with pity for being wrapped up in such a dreary task. There's something awry with the classification and definition (and the certification as a whole) of an 'arborist' that strikes a deep cord for guys that do it as a craft and as a profession and as a lifestyle. It's one of those things, I meet a lot of 'Certified Arborists' but I meet only a small few "Arborists". Call it what you like, but there's a huge gap between the two.... 

jp


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 29, 2011)

jefflovstrom said:


> OK, I will bite1
> How about a row of eucalyptus sideroxylon;s along the back row that have been topped for year's at the back of a hotel with a view?
> Jeff



Okay, so a hotel has been paying to have their trees topped for years... Now, all of a sudden, they call a CA and need a risk assessment? Gimme a break! "Yes sir, the tree topping has caused permanent damage, but you don't care about the trees anyway. It is unlikely the topping will result in an entire tree failure, but allow me to drill a hole here and tap with my mallett here to be sure the decay has not spread that far. Without even climbing the trees, I can tell you that there are weak unions where the topping cuts were made and where the new branches have grown. You may lose some branches that appear otherwise healthy. Why did you top these? You could have planted smaller-growing trees or if these were already here, performed some reduction pruning while treating with growth regulator. I could have my climber get in there and remove some of the defects and select permanent branches. Here is an hourly rate and estimate of how long I think it will take, but I am hesitant to remove much more foliage as the trees need all the leaves possible to make food so they can attempt to recover from the damage. Oh, what's that, you don't want to pay for my consult? Yes, I figured you would pull a stunt like that. Why don't you have your tree-topping buddy advise you some more?"

BTW, we were talking about risk assessment, so while I understand the need for climbers, respect the knowledge and skills, and realize there are some specific examples of why climbing is important to tree inspections and risk assessment, I have to ask again: When assessing tree risk, what percentage of trees need to have an aerial inspection?


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 29, 2011)

Still waiting for a response to that question, but I thought of something: While I am doing risk assessments, consults, inspections, etc..., I am being paid by the hour by the client. If the client has a limited budget, it only allows a few minutes for each tree, and a little longer for heritage trees or some tree(s) that are special to the client. If I spend an hour climbing around a tree, it really limits the length of time I can spend on the rest of the trees; or if I climb them all, the bill is going to be through the roof. The clock is ticking. So, whether I do the climbing or not, the client will need to pay someone to climb the tree (if it warrants it). I am not climbing the tree for free, neither is my climber or anyone else. If it needs to be climbed, what difference does it make who climbs it?

And to comment on the remark made earlier that the guys with the notepads turn their nose at the climbers, I am sure you can find some that will, but that is generally not the case. The climbers (not all, just some) that may be considered to be "beneath" someone are the ones that truly are beneath everyone for all the right reasons: alcohol, drugs, ignorance, police record, poor manners, etc... If you are educated, respectful, and relatively clean-cut, you are on the same level as the others. If you have an additional skill, such as climbing, you may even be escalated to another level. You know the ones that seem to drag the profession down: ripped shirt, missing teeth, body odor, cigarette, dip, foul mouth, hung over, talkin' 'bout "toppin', lion's tailin', and wound paint," etc... Those guys will be sneered no matter if they are climbers or pan-handlers.


----------



## lxt (Dec 30, 2011)

Chris, I can only think you have been in this biz for a short time & are prolly in your 20`s late or early 30`s.......& the reason I say this is beacause it is with that age group that I find that they need to create excuses for the "WANT" not to climb or to engage in hard work. Its not that they cant.........they just want a clean job & are usually lazy & think hard work is below them!!

your reference to a climber as a monkey shows the thought process many like you have, you think that cause you went to college, got a degree in biz, started a tree service & hired a few less fortunate types with no degree & a hard work ethic you can sit in your truck or in the office with paper & pencil looking like more than you are!!!! 

If you think you & you monkeys are that good, come up to the Allegheny National Forest & do a canopy sweep gathering items for lab study to try & define why certain species are declining & there is no bucket access!! some of these majestic beauties are well over 100 ft tall, & yes we are doing risk assessments aloft (atleast that is what the sign off sheet says), It cracks me up when I hear guys come on here & defend not being able to climb.........to me those types are worthless & shouldnt be in our trade doing any thing but bringing real tree guys (climbers) their coffee!!

Funny......the project Im about to finish up the non climbing CA would walk around with his little range finder looking @ the canopy of trees in question & every statement would end with.............."tree appears" , "tree has possible signs of", "cannot definatively state" & so on.......... anything to avoid being responsible cause he didnt have the ability or want to truly find out...............WHY?



*CAUSE THE WORTHLESS IDIOT CANT?WONT CLIMB*.......! how many CA`s do we need for the obvious tree problems, really? or the BCMA? just about any one worth their salt can say....looks like EAB, ALB, root rot, co-dom stem failure, Dutch elm, etc.... so how laughable is it when one of these great educated types cant climb up to inspect the cable & brace system, Lightning system install...........? but have to call a climber!!


----------



## lxt (Dec 30, 2011)

Chris Francis said:


> I can generally get to the area with a bucket truck or ladder.
> 
> But as I said, when an aerial inspection is warranted, my climber is typically going to be in the tree anyway (bucket or monkey). While my guys are swinging around, I can go talk to the next customer
> 
> "Yes m'am, the plumber cut through all the roots 4 feet away from the trunk. This makes the tree much more likely to fail in this direction. The tip dieback you see is a result of the injury and will worsen with time. The tree will also hollow out over time, but the biggest concern for me right now is the structural defect below ground. And, oh yeah, you need an aerial inspection!"




What a bunch of arrogant prattle, lets break this post down shall we?

"bucket truck or ladder"................do you have a steiner? what you really meant is one of your monkeys will get up there!!

your guys typically will be in the tree anyway?................. so you are gonna writee out an RA-report from what one of your monkeys tells you? or you dont give reports for inspections? cause thats what I run into, CA tells home owner tree is fine & structurally sound (from what can be viewed externally & without special needs devices).........this is literally what he stated in his report & bam............had he climbed the tree & viewed the hollow in the section over the house that family wouldnt have a sugar maple for a chandeleer...........he charged this family $250.00 for a consult & assessment...but he dont climb!!! Im doing all in my power to make sure he is held accountable & hope his CA is taken away!! worthless bum, guess its easier to write & make false claims than to actually do the job, thats what its coming to!!

Now onto your 3rd & final plumber scenario............did you really need a certification to tell the lady that a plumber (noticeably) trenched through her yard 4ft from the tree? I bet a 8th grader has the ability to make that assessment & provide the statements you just did............and without a certification........my how can that be!!! Now how bout you make a suggestion on how it might be remedied & oh BTW..... tip dieback does not always mean a structual below ground defect!!!!!



LXT.........................where do these guys come from?


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 30, 2011)

*Tree climbing Daphne*

LXT,
Again, very combative. Again, I have climbed and can still if need be. I choose not to because it makes more sense to have others do it for me, just like you cannot expect a lawyer to type his own reports, a doctor to sweep his own floors, or Bill Gates to actually put together every computer and write every line of code. As for doing hard work, I find it difficult to do manual labor anymore between emails, phone calls, office drudgery, and talking with clients. I enjoy manual labor, but it makes little sense to leave my phone in the truck and disappear for hours to do "work," meanwhile I have 10-20 guys standing around somewhere waiting on me to answer my phone. All I am saying is that CA's don't have to be climbers. I know you disagree; that's fine. There is much more to tree care than climbing - even you know that. And that most assessments will not warrant or finance a climbing inspection. The term "monkey" is not meant to be derogatory, but rather to create imagery (swinging around in the canopy of trees) and an attempt to add some humor. I'm not following the Steiner comment, maybe that is before my time. I looked at a live oak yesterday with a small section of dead branches and scorched leaves. Fortunately the limbs affected were close enough to the ground that I could reach them, but if they were not, I would have gotten up there to inspect and take a sample. That is a health issue though, not structural. As for your buddy that missed the hollow in the tree, I see it both ways: There was likely an indication that could have been seen from the ground as to the defect, but one cannot be expected to climb every tree for inspection. Furthermore, if the client is paying hourly, there often is not time allotted for aerial inspections. If there is, what is the difference between me doing it and having someone else do it? Maybe I should add to my list of disclaimers that an aerial inspection is available upon request. We will already recommend this service if there is cause of concern or the tree or target is extremely valuable, which generally means the funds are available to do so. I still have not gotten an answer to the easy question of how often a risk assessment requires a climber. Sure there are some, but how about as a percentage? An experienced arborist should know the rough math on this.

What it boils down to is that LXT is mad that he has to work with his hands. Maybe there are others out there that are jealous of LXT because they have to sit behind a desk all day, and would rather be doing something "productive." To each his own. Trust me, most days, I wish I had a regular job and got to clock in and out, but I don't. I feel your pain on the younger generation wanting to "not work." All these kids think they are entitled to a cooshy job making $100K + bennies... all for doing nothing... and they all want to be the manager, even though know nothing about managing or the job they want to manage. 

On the plumber comment, I find that people do not know or understand where tree roots are, what they do, and how trees work. In this field, there is advice and old wive's tales abound. Seems like everyone has different information and recommendations. So, even though I don't need a cert. to to tell someone the obvious (to us) that trenching through the roots affects the tree (structure and health), the cert. certainly gives me some credit over the plumber, contractor, yard man, etc... that have varying opinions. I am quick to whip out my certification, licenses, standards, BMP's, and a brochure from ISA on what I am explaining. Otherwise, I am just another yahoo (which you already think I am... I can live with that). And, yes, I realize staghorning does not always equal a below-ground problem; but you missed the point of the exercise, which was that there was an obvious structural problem that an aerial inspection was not going to help: it would have just cost the customer more money, whether I did it or a monkey did (no pun intended). And of course remedies are discussed, one of which is basal pruning.

The National Forest Project may say "Risk Assessment," but it is really health assessment, pest ID, and investigation. Have fun. I have to go save some trees.


----------



## lxt (Dec 30, 2011)

Mad that I have to work with my hands............?  Chris I enjoy doing what I do & think that those who dont climb & never had just dont have any place in the tree care trade!!!

And it is risk assessment up in the National forest.....funny how I have to fill out a report pertaining to structure which is very detailed & guess what? if there is a noticeable defect aloft that could cause damage to surrounding vegetation that issue must be mitigated............but by whom is the question? Ahh thats right, by me!!! ya know a climbing certified arborist, guess that leaves you & many others out uh? not to mention I am held liable for any mis-diagnosis or faulty report.......something someone with a name of a girl just couldnt understand

you go save your trees & put your monkeys up there to do it, Ill be truly saving trees while working with botanist, horticulturists & biologists..........there is a lot to learn from these folks & ya know what chris....they all wish they could climb & say what a true gift it is........its a shame that people who engage in tree care would even think about not climbing or defend such when those with Masters/Doctorates wish they could....

BTW. maybe I come off combative because non climbing bums think thats ok all the while owning a tree service....




LXT..................


----------



## lxt (Dec 30, 2011)

As for the climber & risk assessment question, it is all to clear that you dont feel the need to take the risk to climb the tree to provide the client with a thorough risk assessment?

so Ill ask you.........if the client is paying for a risk assessment which includes an overall survey/inspection of the tree from canopy to ground & you dont climb to properly assess the tree..........then what do you charge them for? a ground inspection to determine the health & structural integrity of the tree in question? cause if thats the case & a failure occurrs like what I mentioned earlier you may have some liability issues............BTW, that CA I was talking about is in a world of hurt......Ya see even though he threw in a bunch of BS disclaimer type phrases to protect himself, he was professionally bound to provide the service in full & by not climbing the tree which had a defect that was a long time making.......he didnt act prudently & therefore basically didnt fulfill what he claimed........ this is called "FRAUD" & the Atty for the family is rubbing his hands together happily!!

Still want to say Climbing is desirable? LOL



LXT.................


----------



## Chris Francis (Dec 30, 2011)

*Chris Francis Tree Service*

Look, I agree climbing is good. I'm just saying it is not required to be a CA, and for good reason... because there is much more to tree care than climbing. If you don't like ISA's requirements, take it up with them.


----------



## jefflovstrom (Dec 30, 2011)

Chris Francis said:


> Look, I agree climbing is good. I'm just saying it is not required to be a CA, and for good reason... because there is much more to tree care than climbing. If you don't like ISA's requirements, take it up with them.



You come off as a smart-azz and call climbers monkeys. yeah, a joke. Anyway, you are using ISA (loop-holes). Sorry man, but I think you are just what LXT said. I am a CA and get accused of "sitting in my truck, got the heater on, (I cant tell ya what Slayer said), arm chair this and that), 
I will be 51 years old in Feb. and I started in 1977,but I did not get my Cert until about 6 or 7 years ago. I don't climb production, but I still gotta do what I gotta do. Your name is on it.
Jeff


----------



## lxt (Jan 1, 2012)

Chris Francis said:


> Look, I agree climbing is good. *I'm just saying it is not required to be a CA, and for good reason...* because there is much more to tree care than climbing. If you don't like ISA's requirements, take it up with them.




What is the good reason...............? please do tell.

See....here is where most lack the history of what the requirements use to be, When the NAA (national Arborist Assoc, Now TCIA) was the credentialing body, Climbing was required along with many other requirements since gone!!

There were only 48 CA`s east of the Mississippi when I first inquired about being one myself back in 1989.......48, thats it!!! so the ISA takes over....lessens the requirements so that just about any one can be a CA all the while lobbying Govt bodies, utilities, municipalities & so on............WHY? cause more Cert holders means more money & more educational publications to be sold!!

This is taking us off base, but the point is: climbing use to be required, tree ID use to be required, etc.. what else will be dropped to make what was once a prestigous title just a simple first step, anyone can get it certification? years ago we had a discussion on this forum about Certifications & I made the comment about "galactic arborist" just to make fun of the ISA & their creation of new certs to over ride the existing ones.......which they promote as the "hallmark" of their organization!!!

I have sent letters & emails requesting stiffer testing & to bring back the forgotten sections that made this trade/title something more than just a joke!! those replies are humorous to say the least...........basically if I want a more challenging & rewarding position within the arboriculture field I should advance myself through the organization by taking the BCMA test!

even that title & its requirements do not compare to the original CA test/requirements................thats why many I know who were certified prior to ISA involvement have let their credential expire..............its pride for them...........but for the 16,000 + that currently hold it...............they think they have accomplished something????? just a paper title rocky!! do the math & tell me it hasnt catapulted the ISA into another level by lessening requiremnts? BCMA....to sit this is $450 memebr & $550 nonmember...thats ridiculous

I think to be a BCMA climbing should be a requirement............but then most who have that title wouldnt have it then would they, cause most are writers of that wonderful educational material needed for CEU`s..............ya know, those who have never climbed, cant climb & dont wanna climb..........but want us to have to buy their publications to maintain our Cert, what a joke!!!!





LXT.................


----------



## jefflovstrom (Jan 1, 2012)

I hear you Doug, but let me play advocate for a minute. Let's say it is the way you want it.
Now you are later in age. Maybe not up to climbing alot. 
Do you lose your cert?
Jeff :msp_confused:


----------



## jefflovstrom (Jan 1, 2012)

Chris Francis said:


> Look, I agree climbing is good. I'm just saying it is not required to be a CA, and for good reason..



I am really curious about this. What is the reason? You said for a good reason, what is it?
Jeff


----------



## lxt (Jan 2, 2012)

jefflovstrom said:


> I hear you Doug, but let me play advocate for a minute. Let's say it is the way you want it.
> Now you are later in age. Maybe not up to climbing alot.
> Do you lose your cert?
> Jeff :msp_confused:



Ya know Jeff, I prolly would lose my Cert based on the lab/module part of the exam, Climbing wise I think it is just necessary to be able to go aloft & atleast perform an aerial rescue, where I am at now I think I could still pass a climbing skills test, however.....I think it should have to have been proven one could do such!

In other words if you completed an apprenticeship or have proven experience as a climber then you are ok, I dont think its right to expect a 68 year old guy/gal to engage in a climbing skills test............the problem I have is some 24 yr old who cant land a job in their selected field works at lowes & then bam....they meet the requirements, sit the test & are certified having never climbed, pruned or taken a tree down or worse yet.........Mr. lawn & Landscape wants to be a tree service & thinks their time on the zero turn or planting a boxwood lets them qualify!!!

I think time in grade matters alot Jeff, you & I have been there & done that & yes age catches up.........but to water it down to a point where anyone can obtain it just makes it less important & promoting it will be a PITA.......how wo we seperate ourselves from the lawn service CA.....maybe he BS`s better than me & you but doesnt have a clue....on paper we`re equal & I think Mr. & Ms. Home owner will say: "you are a CA too, well so is mabels lil johnny, he cuts our grass" see what I mean?





LXT............


----------



## Chris Francis (Jan 2, 2012)

jefflovstrom said:


> I am really curious about this. What is the reason? You said for a good reason, what is it?
> Jeff



Guys, I see your points, and I'm not trying to make enemies here; I am just trying to participate in the thread. As for the reasons CA's are not required to climb... because, as I said, ther is much more to arboriculture than climbing. I'm not knocking climbing or looking down on climbers; that's not it at all - we all know climbers are an essential part of arboriculture, but just not the whole thing. A few examples of what arborists can do without climbing:

- Draw plans that use methods to protect existing trees
- Implement plans to protect existing trees during construction
- Design the right trees to go in the right place in the landscape
- Plant (or oversee the planting of) trees the right way
- Grow trees the right way in the nursery
- Develop cultivars that are pest resistant or have other desirable characteristics
- Inspect trees near power lines
- Prune trees near power lines (out of bucket)
- Soil sample and fertilize trees
- Treat trees with injection or basal applications
- Plant and prune shrubs (shrubs are included in arboriculture... not just trees; and most shrubs don't need to be climbed)
- Prune young trees (the removal or reduction of low co-doms is one of the key ways to grow a structurally sound tree)
- Transplant trees the right way
- Consult with clients or public about how trees work and some things they can do themselves (extension comes to mind)
- Sell things to practicing arborists (gear, chemicals, etc...)
- Educate the public and other arborists about proper tree care, etc...
- Study trees (what makes them stand up and fall down - Gilman, Coder, and Shigo come to mind)
- Diagnose plant health problems (yes, I realize you may need to go aloft to do this, but not all the time)
- Assess risk (yes, I realize you may need to go aloft to do this, but it is arguably rare) - for the sake of argument, let's say this:
"Without climbing the tree, air excavating the roots, and performing other arboricultural activities (resistograph, sonogram, etc...), you may not be able to make a solid determination that the tree is structurally sound; however, simple inspections from the ground can easily identify structural defects, and in most cases identify other defects that may need to be investigated further. So, from the ground, you may not be able to say the tree is safe, but you can say that it is a hazard." 

Let's face it, if a (typical) client had 100 trees, you would walk the property looking at each one of them individually (roots, trunk, branches, canopy), but the ones that warranted further inspection would have some indication thereof. You may want to access 4 or 5 (as an example) of the trees briefly, then spend a little more time in the 1 or 2 that either have the worst problems or are located nearest the target (I have asked several times for the actual percentage of trees that are climbed for risk assessment, but I have yet to see an answer; that's because the number is really low). Some of those you can access with a ladder, a pole pruner, or bucket truck. The ones that need to be climbed, the first thing that should be done is assess risk of the tree before climbing. That's in the standards; but how is it possible to assess risk without climbing? Here it is:

_ANSI Z133.1 8.1.1
A visual hazard assessment, including a root collar inspections, shall be performed prior to climbing, entering, or performing any work in a tree. _

Wow! So, it is possible to do risk assessment without climbing, otherwise you couldn't climb to assess the risk without first climbing to assess the risk, which would make an impossibly endless loop. 

And, yes, by climbing, you can potentially find other hazards that could not have been seen otherwise, but before going aloft, you had better make sure first the tree you will be climbing will not come crashing down with you in it. So, when you do this before climbing, what is it called, if not risk assessment? 

"Arboriculture is the study of trees and other plants. An arborist is someone that works with trees or other plants. Certified Arborists are tree care specialists dedicated to excellence in the field of arboriculture." - ISA


----------



## lxt (Jan 2, 2012)

Nice twist on ANSI regarding visually assessment..............this protocol is used for very obvious hazards such as: electrical, widow makers, dead limbs, etc.. it is not to be used as a *"complete*" assessment nor an assessment for "*monetary gain*" it is an assessment by the climber, for the climber & his safety while ascending the tree!!!


Chris, you can defend your opinion & hey, thats your right...........but all the things you mention outside of climbing are basically for a landscape company, Again..........if you are an Arborist (care for trees) & you cant climb/never did, in my opinion you should not be able to be a certified arborist, Sorry!* to be certified you should atleast have to perform an aerial rescue *& thats just a safety thing

the majority of your list is a joke: study trees??? consult with clients??? transplant??? prune young trees & shrubs???? grow trees??? plant trees??? & so on............so now that we have defined what the lady working at the garden section @ lowes can do....now lets throw in the real life of it & see how a non-climbing CA can consult with Mr. & Ms. homeowner in regard to to their 20 year old cable & brace system??? or better yet replace the top portion of the lightning arrest system that a wind storm kinda messed up & the obvious.......limb over house removal....!

Ya see, in order to be able to talk intelligently about trees one must have atleast worked in them (read shigo!!!) & not off an orchard ladder, get up in them, walk out on the limbs, see first hand the canoed out hollow upper limbs in a norway maple after line clearance, collect samples of leaves from the crown tips affected by a blythe unknown & etc....

you seem to be a staunch defender of one not needing to climb in order to be a CA & while currently that is not a required ability to be a CA..................I have no respect for a non climbing CA that has no want to atleast try it!!! to me its like being a certified welder that never laid a bead...........its just wrong & no company that you work for will you find men who climb & run bucket every day that will give respect or an ounce of care to what a CA has to say or do that has never done it themselves!!!

how do you consult with anybody about an issue aloft intelligently when you have never even been there?? what you just memorize & repeat what it says in the book?? thats a joke & the person doing such should be fined for fraud!!! basically a non climbing arborist is a non practicing arborist & maybe your credential should read differently.... I know:

Certified non climbing Arborist......there it is!!! you can only work up to 10ft off the ground, you are a hedge trimmer!!!! thats what we need.........specific designated credentials so people know what you are!!!! can you imagine?


you never did provide us with a good reason.....................just excuses!


LXT................


----------



## Chris Francis (Jan 2, 2012)

*Pointless dribble*

Whatever, dude. I don't really care what you think or believe. I thought I was entering an intelligent conversation. Instead, I think I just got dumber. I'm done.


----------



## sgreanbeans (Jan 3, 2012)

*For what its worth*

I agree with both both. There is alot more to trees than just climbing, however, I think that if you are a CA, that you should be able to do all aspects, climbing included. With that said, there is a big dif between a guy who has never left the ground and a guy who worked in the field several years, moved up the chain and became the boss, who doesn't climb anymore. Not because he cant , but because he doesn't need to. I think that if you are a CA, you should have the ability and experience. A CA that has never been up, that cannot climb and prune a tree correctly, I think is missing a big part and I do not consider them a true Arborist. To me, that person would better be decried as a botanist, biologist or a horticulturalist. Arborist, by definition, is someone who woks in trees, not below them. Again, Chris and Jeff meet the mold of what I am saying. Both could drop what they are doing and go complete a removal like the best of them, they don't, because they have others that do it for them........ because they are da boss, and bosses should get to ride in the truck, as they have "been there, done that" Now a person, who study's the test book, gets their CA and has never been off the ground............ I have little faith in. Too many people rely on that book for all their knowledge


----------



## superjunior (Jan 3, 2012)

sgreanbeans said:


> I agree with both both. There is alot more to trees than just climbing, however, I think that if you are a CA, that you should be able to do all aspects, climbing included. With that said, there is a big dif between a guy who has never left the ground and a guy who worked in the field several years, moved up the chain and became the boss, who doesn't climb anymore. Not because he cant , but because he doesn't need to. I think that if you are a CA, you should have the ability and experience. A CA that has never been up, that cannot climb and prune a tree correctly, I think is missing a big part and I do not consider them a true Arborist. To me, that person would better be decried as a botanist, biologist or a horticulturalist. Arborist, by definition, is someone who woks in trees, not below them. Again, Chris and Jeff meet the mold of what I am saying. Both could drop what they are doing and go complete a removal like the best of them, they don't, because they have others that do it for them........ because they are da boss, and bosses should get to ride in the truck, as they have "been there, done that" Now a person, who study's the test book, gets their CA and has never been off the ground............ I have little faith in. Too many people rely on that book for all their knowledge



agree 100%


----------



## lxt (Jan 3, 2012)

Chris Francis said:


> Whatever, dude. I don't really care what you think or believe. I thought I was entering an intelligent conversation. Instead, I think I just got dumber. I'm done.



Chris, I/we are not sure you were anything above dumber to begin with?? however im not sure how you figure the conversation went wrong, most are just saying the current requirements are to soft & need to be muchly improved upon.

Ya see those of us who climb & have been climbers understand much differently about certain things as opposed to a non climber, I dont put anyone down for making a living..........but thats not to say I wont ridicule you being in this trade doing the easy stuff that a grass cutter can do while thinking you are my equal....!




LXT............


----------



## Corymbia (Jan 3, 2012)

lxt said:


> Chris, I/we are not sure you were anything above dumber to begin with?? however im not sure how you figure the conversation went wrong, most are just saying the current requirements are to soft & need to be muchly improved upon.
> 
> Ya see those of us who climb & have been climbers understand much differently about certain things as opposed to a non climber, I dont put anyone down for making a living..........but thats not to say I wont ridicule you being in this trade doing the easy stuff that a grass cutter can do while thinking you are my equal....!
> 
> ...



LXT, not sure I can agree with you on two accounts. Firstly, aving climbed in my earlier years, I appreciate the great skill and physical effort required. Having crossed to the dark side as a consultant, I often yearn for the simpler days spent outside rather than being locked up in the lab or library or stuck behind a computer screen. Neither are simple and both require far more expertise than would render the average lawn mowing contractor nothing short of inept.

Secondly, I am not sure that it is polite to call anyone dumb except ourselves.:msp_w00t:


----------



## lxt (Jan 4, 2012)

Corymbia said:


> LXT, not sure I can agree with you on two accounts. Firstly, aving climbed in my earlier years, I appreciate the great skill and physical effort required. Having crossed to the dark side as a consultant, I often yearn for the simpler days spent outside rather than being locked up in the lab or library or stuck behind a computer screen. Neither are simple and both require far more expertise than would render the average lawn mowing contractor nothing short of inept.
> 
> Secondly, I am not sure that it is polite to call anyone dumb except ourselves.:msp_w00t:





Not sure what your point is, not sure what requires more expertise either?????

Look, Climbing was part of the requirement & was removed for obvious reasons......mainly cause it limited the field which in turn limited the amount of revenue brought in........some will say that this is false but I ask them to explain why the requirements for the CA Cert are less now that many years ago......I hear all the excuses why climbing is not a requirement & Blah Blah Blah but none are good reason!!! the true fact is those who write the exams arent proficient at climbing & in some cases have never climbed at all, they think of climbers as the "Labor" end of this trade & therefore think they are above & that climbing is below them.

Many think that a Cert gives them some magical power that catapults them to the "cushy" front of the line, Non climbing type jobs & when they get there their swollen heads & ego take over............I have been part of just about all aspects of this trade & CLIMBING has always put me in front of the rest of the non climbing Cert holders....

As for a risk Assessment cert & the overall abilities/experience one must have to perform such.............well climbing is a main part of that & ya can argue different all ya want, this isnt taking a leaf sample off a boxwood, or fixing the split in an emerald Arborvitae from snowload or spider mites on alberta spruce....etc.... No, one will need to get aloft within the majestic trees that need inspected due to historical nature, insurance purposes, mapping, insect damage & general overall assessment & repair if need be!!

Again, damages & possible failures happen aloft along with many other things, try telling the adjuster why the limb 40ft up failed without climbing it, taking pictures, samples & writing the report.............you gonna put your trust in a non climbing CA/RA or you gonna trust the guy thats all in one like me?............its not even a question....all if given a choice will chose the latter!

If you cant climb & are performing assessments & other diagnosis for purposes of monetary gain.........hope you have a good insurance carrier......................you are not a CA/RA at this point.........you are an educated, landscaper/lawn cutter.....sorry!


Oh & BTW...........wasnt calling anyone Dumb, just questioning if he was ever above that????




LXT.............


----------



## Chris Francis (Jan 5, 2012)

*ISA qualification - Tree Risk Assessment*

Done with the bickering, but (on topic) I received an email from ISA:


CERT Today 2012

What makes Qualification different from Certification?

ISA is introducing its first qualification in the near future. Understanding how it differs from your current certification will explain how a qualification can benefit your career development as a tree care professional. >>Read more

International Society of Arboriculture (click here to read the entire page)

"The first qualification that ISA plans to launch is on the topic of Tree Risk Assessment. Working with an international panel of experts, ISA is currently developing the qualification and will announce when it becomes available."


----------



## lxt (Jan 5, 2012)

i CANT WAIT TO SEE WHO IS ON THAT PANEL OF EXPERTS!!!!

I got the same email & it went to the delete file, this will just be another Cert with qualifications made up in order to obtain it!!! you watch & see who is on that panel: Ins adjusters, authors, CEO`s for Davey & Asplundh maybe Bartlett? owners of small tree care companies who no longer work & a safety person or two???? plus others who have no hands on experience....Oooops Ill take that back

They`ll have some form of hands on experience but very limited, usually ISA puts a big name on their panel for promotional sake & its usually an ITCC person wearing a stihl shirt & giving their Bio stating how important this will be & so on..... kinda like a "paid non attorney spokesperson" but just a little different?

In the ISA world the saying is: another Cert, another dollar!!.............it would just be to easy to improve on what we already have & incorporate new things in there uhh? ahh thats right, no money to be made that way...lets go through all the rigors of a new Cert/Qualifications that will take twice as long..... yeah that sounds good uhh?

I could only hope people will see the BS in all this & boycott these worthless new certs, If people would just tell ISA....NO, add that onto our CA credential so it will be more meaningful...................but why would ISA do that? after all the more patches on your jacket make you look good & that translates into money spent...............& lots of it!!!!!




LXT...............


----------



## jefflovstrom (Jan 5, 2012)

I see Doug's point. If I am a CA and already do all the stuff that cert is about and are now becoming something that I will feel forced to obtain just to keep up in the game with a bunch of cert seeking egomaniac's that are the type Doug is talking about, Yup. 
I got my CTSP only because I need it. We know this stuff and all it would take is to include all of it into tha regular CA cert and include all they stuff they got rid of when we got our's. BTW, you used to have to correctly spell the name and species of the ID part.
When I got my CTW, it was a multiple choice for about 4 hours and then it was a ( what do you call it when you sit down across from the guy and answer question's), and ID was walking around UC Riverside giving both common and Botanical names. 
Funny, that is when I learned what an Arbutus was. 
Anyway, I think the dis-content is the fact that money drive's an interest and those of us that have invested for many year's could be challenged by a less than equal boobie that is just trying to capitalize on an investment that must pay off.
Please God, I hope I don't sound like FTA!
I think any 'Up-Grade's" to the CA cert should automatically apply to the CA without paying money and taking time off the job to take the test.
BTW, I climbed an oak today to check on a cable we did. Not cable though, Cobra, just checked it out.
Jeff :msp_biggrin:


----------



## Pelorus (Jan 12, 2012)

Filled out on-line registration for CA exam today. Sigh; going back to the dark side, lol.
Gonna have to blow the dust off Shigo & Co. Has been 10 years since the last time, and just filling out the registration thingy was a pita.
The Ontario Chapter receptionist seemed a bit testy on the phone too, come to think of it!


----------



## treeseer (Jan 14, 2012)

Pelorus said:


> Filled out on-line registration for CA exam today. Sigh; going back to the dark side, lol.
> Gonna have to blow the dust off Shigo & Co. Has been 10 years since the last time, and just filling out the registration thingy was a pita....


Nothing worthwhile comes easy; good on you for making that move, whatever the reason.

Just spent 2 days climbing and working with a guy who is on the TRA Qual committee. Learned a lot more about tree risk assessment, a field which is changing daily. Others in that group know trees well. Though many do not still climb, they don't deserve this kind of disrespect.

Hearing these volunteers dissed by vulgar computer "authorities" who "learned it all" decades ago and give little more than abuse is pretty sad, but that's what I get for visiting this place. O and Jeff, glad to hear you can still get up there once in a while! and btw a cable is a cable no matter steel or poly.


----------

