Achilles Heel of many Arborists? Not a "Horticulturist"

The homeowner helper forum had a thread with a question about choosing an arborist or a horticulturist to look at some shrubs.

That pertains to something I've thought about a lot, after being on the Oregon Landscape Contractors Board and dealing with differences of qualifications, testing and licensing in the industry.

I think one of the great Achilles Heels of tree workers, is not being a horticulturist. Too many focus on trees and tree care, but don't have a feel for the whole garden and landscape situation.

For a lot of landscapers, its frequently the same kind of probems, but by not understanding trees.

"Horticulturist" is really the all-encompassing professional title for understanding trees and the smaller plants. Enabling an understanding of the big picture.

In Oregon, one of the industry problems was (is) having the landscapers and tree workers split under two separate license boards. There was a little effort to merge the two a little bit, but the effort stagnated in the state congress due to all the big financial problems that came after "nine-eleven".

I work with landscaping, and I work with trees. And there is very little difference of science, knowledge and technology. Its applied a little bit differently, but the same educational foundation should be taught for trees and landscape work.

I'm a landscaper and am working at doing tree work. I am not much of a student being self taught. But I am trying to learn as much about trees as I do plants and landscapes. Ok
But I am seeing something I've been missing for a while. So ya.

Yes arboriculture is subspecialty of horticulture.

One thing I tell people is that I'm not strong on herbaceous material. With serious gardeners, I will ask questions about what they have and how they do it to learn and get on their good side

As far as shrubs go, IMO that is part of arboriculture. All woody material in your area should be in the mental inventory. Though that will not help when you have the client who knows her sand cherry as a purple plumb. I call all plumb/cherry cvs. I cannot readily ID Prunus after loosing a job because I was not there to read the tag 12 years ago.

Oh then there was the lady who was adamant that she had a flowering crab, not a crabapple....

John Paul Sanborn said:

Yes arboriculture is subspecialty of horticulture. .

Click to expand...

and also part of forestry. I look at arb as a hybrid of the two, like rocknroll was born of the blues and country music.

You need more than hort to have a solid basis for arb, mario, unless the hort in OR goes into great depth on woodies (unlike here in nc and va).

good point on shrubs and other woodies; they are our biz.

It helps to know about local herbaceous stuff; they are associates after all.

My college training was in Hort, but as a treeguy (20 years later), I don't use it much. There's not much calling and what few questions I do get, I may defer to "That's really a landscaper question."

The questions I get most often would be like.

"What should I plant, where?"
"That's more a landscaper question."

"Is a yew a bush or a tree?"
"Yes."

"Can you come with me to the nursery and help me choose a tree?"
"No."

"Can you transplant this viburnum for me"
"I can whack it and yank it out by the roots. Otherwise, that's really a landscape thing."

"I have some work I'd like you to do on my wrist-diameter wisteria."
"Ya know,.... Landscape guys love that sort of thing. I try to stick with tasks that require climbing."

And then the one I really have mixed emotions over,
"Can you help me plan and build a tree nursery."


I understand the hort / arboriculture crossover but the distinctions are fairly clear, arbo creates a lot of waste material and requires working at heights. Horticulture / landcape is more of installation and maintainance of plant material that does not require working at height. I am hired by landscapers to do aerial work. I refer to them work that requires aesthetics, planning, choosing and installation.

Granted, this is a broad generalization, with lots of exceptions, I'm sure. And I'm on board with Mario, "And there is very little difference of science, knowledge and technology." Very, very true. My tree care started after college with a Bonsai addiction that went on for several years- landscape material that was cultivated as miniaturized trees. A true crossover area, equally tree, equally hort.

I'd love to have half the knowledge and understanding that Mario Vaden has. This cat is an inspiration.

Tree Machine said:

I understand the hort / arboriculture crossover but the distinctions are fairly clear, arbo creates a lot of waste material and requires working at heights. Horticulture / landcape is more of installation and maintainance of plant material that does not require working at height. .

Click to expand...

well Jim that is one way to look at it. I often feel more like an arborist working on the ground and a vegetation manager when climbing and cutting.

I hear what you are saying tho on deferring what you do not want to (or cannot afford to) do to specialists. Trim wisteria? Sure, at my arborist rate i would be happy to but they would not be happy to pay that.

Tree Machine said:

My college training was in Hort, but as a treeguy (20 years later), I don't use it much. There's not much calling and what few questions I do get, I may defer to "That's really a landscaper question."

Click to expand...

May depend on the area and type of landscaping.

I use horticulture quite a few times when the trees are larger.

It helps me convey to customers what I'm doing in the their tree - like thinning, and how it's related to their turf care, like will they need to overseed with a shade grass or not.

Turfgrass ID allows me to know if they already have a shade grass under the tree. In that case, if its not doing good, then I can discuss other angles like competition for food and roots.

They may ask or hope that I can thin more of the tree than I have, for more light to the turf, and if that's not practical or healthy for the tree, I'm equipped with the facts for the entire landscape situation.

If a tree needs removal in their yard or if the neighbors plants will be sun damaged by their removal, knowing a lot of the small plants and their light sensitivity helps during every removal. That way removal can be postponed, or suggestions can be given about how to prepare for it - for both sides of the fence.

So at least weekly, the horticulture stuff is useful. Some yards, it wouldn't really matter (brown grass and just a few big trees).

There's more plants out there than I'd want to know about, but I try to remember the ones available in the commercial size nurseries. The retail nurseries have some "exotic" stuff, but much of their odd-balls are still the same species, just unusual varieties.

Not a Horticulturist, But an Arborist

I had always planed to be good at one thing and trees became it. I do some plants, just to help a Homeowner to pick what may work under a Older Tree under-story Shrub ( small trees) or replacing , filling a spot where we had removed a tree or Shrub with something else. I also would When we were cutting or pulling them out talk to the homeowner about coming back after work and Transplanting the to my yard. If it was a nice plant and it could be moved most all had no problem with me moving the to a new location. Some times it may be in their yard , if not it would come home with my yard Later if I needed one for a new spot or if something got crushed in a removal I had things I could replace what was broken. Did my hole yard in IL. this way, as well as had Shrubs to move elsewhere when needed.
Still doing this in Arkansas

Tree Machine said:

"Can you come with me to the nursery and help me choose a tree?"

Click to expand...

Sure, but my normal rates apply

I have both.

Job Corps Tree said:

I also would When we were cutting or pulling them out talk to the homeowner about coming back after work and Transplanting the to my yard. Did my hole yard in IL. this way, as well as had Shrubs to move elsewhere when needed.
Still doing this in Arkansas

Click to expand...

I have a yard full of rescued shrubs and trees, too. Shrub care is good arboriculture and good to know about; see attached. Using groundcover like hosta to encourage tree and landscape appreciation is also good. You got hosta in Oz, ekka?

Dan if you think that cutting down a tree is more like arborist work than diagnosis and treatment on the ground, you are sadly mistaken.

Good points mario; if we know how to care for the landscape we take better care for the trees.

treeseer said:

Using groundcover like hosta to encourage tree and landscape appreciation is also good.

Click to expand...

They are good management tools too. Everyone tells people to mulch under trees, I tell them to add perennial beds because they are going to water more often when they have hostas and ferns.

TREECO ( Non Climbing CERT.ARBORISTS

I do agree .It has been a long standing Misnomer for some that can't or won't Climb. How can someone who has Climbed any trees be called a C.A .It has been like the 2 class should been reversed, I mean the CTW and CA . We called them a Arm Chair Arborist or Ground Bound Arborist

Job Corps Tree said:

I do agree .It has been a long standing Misnomer for some that can't or won't Climb. How can someone who has Climbed any trees be called a C.A .It has been like the 2 class should been reversed, I mean the CTW and CA .

Click to expand...

That is the elitist mentality of the climber. Arboriculture is not about tree climbing, trim and remove is a small part of the discipline. Though it is the biggest part of the employment and revenue in the industry.

If everyone were a climber then there would not be the people to do the research needed to expand the knowledge base.

You would not want to spend hours in a lab in front of a microscope, why should they have to get into the canopies?

I'd love it if more nurserymen were CA, if they grow small trees, why require that they climb big ones?

Everyone has their own business model, if someones is shrubs and small ornamentals that can be worked from the ground, why require big tree climbing.

We called them a Arm Chair Arborist or Ground Bound Arborist

Click to expand...

That is the kind of talk that makes climbers look like arogant, idiot, primadonas :sword:

TreeCo said:

Guy I prune ('climb and cut'?) ten times more trees than I remove. I call it pruning or trimming. Suggesting climbing is only for removal is a misleading suggestion at best.

It seems the value of being a climbing certified arborist is under attack these days. Your use of the terms "climbing and cutting" and "vegetation manager" to describe what you do and how you feel as a climbing BCMA is just adding sticks to the fire of the diminished value of being an ISA Certified Arborist.

I strongly feel the designation of being an ISA Certified Arborist should include climbing along with a basic knowledge of tree biology and pruning. The non climbing certified arborist should be call just what they are....Non Climbing Certified Arborist.

Click to expand...

So you think because I quite climbing in the early nineties, that I shouldn't be a Certified Arborist?

Even though I do reams of arboriculture, and work with other climbing Certified Arborists?

Now, I don't find that to be the best suggestion of the month

I equate arboriculture with arboriculture - or tree care.

And I equate tree climbing with rock climbing. Seriously. Climbing is ropes, gear, hardware, hardhats. Climbing can be done by anybody who has no knowledge of arboriculture.

That's why I suggest sticking with arboriculture being the broad range of tree knowledge and tree care.

TreeCo said:

N..... but when the climber also has a knowledge of arboriculture much better arboriculture is practiced in the tree.

Click to expand...

True, when the practitioner cares about trees, then it is true tree care. the others are quite often just wood cutters.

I am firmly against landscapers calling themselves tree trimmers, or tree trimmers calling themselves landscapers. As arborists, yes they can cross over for diagnosis, or phc, but the specifics of landscape design, etc. I have no expertise in, in reverse order the dynamics of removing hazard trees in areas inaccessible to equipment, I would never trust to a landscaper.
Then there is the insurance. I pay big bucks for insurance that covers tree trimming...a landscaper gets by for a small percentage of that because they are only insured for tree work up to six inches in diameter...or 20 feet tall. Why should I have to compete with someone who is required to pay half my bills to do the same job. Licensing them both under the same letterhead is like licensing an electrician to be a plumber, or a carpenter to be an escavator.
Aboriculture is a specialization of horticulture...and the basics of hort applies, but the dynamics of aerial work are a different animal.

Ground bound arborist; I like that. In a semester paper in the 80's I differentiated between the perspectives of the terrestrial turtle and the arboreal arbiter; the professor said whaaaa but gave me an A out of confusion I think...

If opinions on a tree are rendered without aerial inspection they are underinformed and often wrong. But Dan and my other brothers in the saddle, I agree with jps about the primadonna thing--even if you can climb, you have no grounds to look down on other arborists, or say their certification should be separate from yours. If you want to be recognized as a climbing tree worker, get the ctw.
:jawdrop:

TreeCo said:

Just how does a non climbing arborist do an aerial inspection?

Click to expand...

By proxy, getting someone up there with a camera. Binoculars can give a good picture but they cannot give the view from above.

It's still my opinion that there should be a separate certification for a non climbing arborist and that certified arborist should be the title of the certification for a climbing aborist.

Click to expand...

There already is; ca + CTW is what you are talking about. No it's not a cash grab, and yes you should be willing to take a test every 15 years.

Around Atlanta there are a lot of non climbing certified arborist selling work that non certified arborist and non certified tree workers are doing. The system set up by the ISA has left the door wide open for this type of abuse of the CA designation and this door is going to stay open for decades.

Click to expand...

I totally completely agree with you. The dilution of requirements--CEUflation--keeps CAs giving opinions that they are not qualified to give. I get called in behind a lot of these jokers and the level of ignorance and arrogance is frightening.

And yes by and large isa seems more concerned about keeping the numbers up than keeping the quality up, and that is a bummer. But only member involvement will change that, not grousing on a forum board.:taped:

TreeCo said:

Just how does a non climbing arborist do an aerial inspection?

Click to expand...

Either by the mean which Treeseer mentioned, or what I do - work in conjunction with another Certified Arborist who climbs.

The relevant point is, both the certified climber and myself, are making decisions by combining virtually the same exact science, knowledge and skills.

The third option is the bucket or lift.

A fourth would be renting the "Trunk Monkey"

Your question would invite-in the concept of medium size trees: too high for an orchard ladder, but too small for climbing gear. What happens with the hundreds of climbing arborists who don't have a bucket, or don't rent one? How do they evaluate those trees without climbing them or using a lift?