2 Ways to give Arboriculture a Black Eye

[moss]

Holy crap!

After reading "The Wild Trees," I wrote the author a nasty letter. It thoroughly po'd me that this group of Ninja climbers (covered in the book), once they became older and became "The Establishment," took so many steps to make sure that no other climbers could climb "their trees," citing the usual environmental sensitivity issues.

I'm glad I didn't realize this thread was gong on earlier. What a mess. just wanted to comment on the researcher comment above....

When Sillett (canopy researcher featured in the book) says on his web site that he doesn't think rec climbers should be climbing on PNW old-growth he's expressing his opinion. Sillett is not shutting the door on anyone, he doesn't have anything to do with formulating rules and regs on state or federally managed old-growth redwood preserves.

If you want to climb legally in those places don't roll over and whine, put together a for-real research proposal and apply for a permit.

Sending negative comments to the author of the 'The Wild Trees' about what Sillett did or didn't do seems totally misdirected, Preston wrote the book and doesn't have anything to do with what Sillett thinks, says or does.

Ok, I feel better now.
-moss (a rec climber)

 

[oldirty]

moss! when the next climb bud?

 

[treemandan]

With a saddle? Almost 2 years.

Without a saddle? Recreationally and work related for over 35 years and I've got the pictures to prove it although I don't know how to put links, jpegs, IMG or pictures in here. I'll have to ask vaden for help. :hmm3grin2orange: How about you? How long you been in the canopy?

And internet jockey? Seems you have almost 3 times as many post as I do. Hmmm...

I swear you said " I regret not taking pictures of when I free climbed".

I swear I said " Geez, I sure would like to see that"

DON"T GET MAD AT ME NOW !

No, I am not trying to bash you, I do wanna see those pictures though.

 

[treemandan]

Why don't you come on over, we'll go for a long walk.

That is a very nice gesture Nails. It warms my heart to hear about people reaching out to others. That is what life is all about.

I think this is why I got the boot outta the other forum. I was angered by people claiming to be so smart and good and righteous but couldn't ( or wouldn't) find thier own penis when they got ten feet above the ground.
I had a major problem with this ( still kinda do) and went on a Certified Arborist bashing spree right off the bat. I did make my apology for judging many by the acts of a few but those few really got me twerked up.
Armchair Arborist, so prim and proper. Yapping about what is right and wrong. Please, someone, make them stop.
There are do-er's and then there are say-er's. The say-er's make it sound perfect but the do-er's know that ain't so. "Less jerk, more work", I say it all the time.
I also can't stand people who bath everyday and wear deoderant. There is way to many kinds of soap on the store shelves.
Yes, animals ( but we do have emotions), compared to the whinning it seems so many purebred Americans do Mexicans aren't looking so bad.
I always wondered what " those who can't do, teach" really meant. Cause I always thought if you couldn't do it then maybe you should stop talking. I had a teacher that had that on his car. I wondered if he was making fun of himself.
That's it for now I guess, I don't want to spend my life caught up in this but I also guess next time I run into one of these guys in person I would like to go for a walk with them too, it doesn't even have to be a long one.

 

[treemandan]

Oh I just had to say that I am headed to the YMCA to take my kid swimming. You know the Y? That is the place where they built a huge room room for people to go walking in. most likly Darth Vaden is on the best treadmill allready. I said ANIMALS not rats.

 

[treemandan]

And they have mexicans at the Y too ceptin they ain't there to work out, they are mopping the floors.

 

[tree MDS]

Too much hate

And "the dan" rocks on!!

Good hearing from the dan, always makes one think some - and lighten up a little too.

what are we?? ...just a bunch of treedogs after all - at least I hope!!

Hug em, kill em, we all got things in common.

 

[moss]

moss! when the next climb bud?

Whenever you're available, I've got some tall white pines perfect for buzzards to perch in.
-moss

 

[oldirty]

sweet.

terry told me to tell you that he owes you a beer. so you know he's in too.

nothing like being perched on a branch way up there taking it in, huh?

i say a sweet early spring climb with the boys would be cool. who got a big tree in their backyard who wants to party? something near a bbq would be cool with me.

 

[treemandan]

awesome.




i'm all for hugging a tree worth hugging, and these big fellas are worth the squeeze but

what? the tree next to this one a thousand years later wont be there?

cycle of life, no?

i'm not saying go in there and lay waste but if its an ecosystem that is a living thing then you know what? yup. there's gonna be another thousand year old tree some where down the line right next to the one thats either two thousand years old or fallen over from age and creating a nice spot for the next thousand year old tree to grow.

as long as the sun is gonna shine and some water gets mixed in the tree is gonna grow.

climb the mofo if you got the balls.


hey jps. just cause i dont know all the big words in the tree world you gonna ignore every question i ask you? boots in another thread....you to good to answer a fellow tree WORKING man's questions?

Yes the cycle of life BUT that don't mean we can do as we please ALL the time.
" Just cause I got long hair and wear sandals don't mean I am a hippy", that's what I said to the hippies.
Well I still wear sandals but I cut my hair. Why? cause it got full of sweat and wood chips ( I said I don't bath everyday). The sandals seem a logicall choice too.
There is a line in the middle of what you were talking about, its tough to stay on.
I used to ride my bicycle in the park, also I was a volunteer to help repair trails. Its was said us moutainbikers trashed the trails although some said this was not the case. I said" If you are't trashing the place riding then you are obviously not doing it right".
Yes, we wrecked the trails. Some trails were made for wrecking and some were not. Good planning, thought for what you do, and helping to replenish what you use helps you stay in the middle. There is no one side to anything and we only argue these points with each other to help us feel justified even though we allready are. One man's this is another's that.
Is it wrong to chop down a 1000 year old tree? Its is if you just chop it down and that's all you do. You know as well as I do if there were not people saying " stop cutting" the greedy ones would have us chop em all down real quick so they could get rich or even worse, just for fun. RESPONSIBLITY. True, it sucks but you can't deny it.
As an animal we need to take from the earth, as an animal with a thought process we need to give back.

 

[oldugly]

The only way that rec climbing gives arborists a black eye is when arm chair arborists have nothing better to do than complain about them. In simple fact I don't know of any respectable arborists who climb "protected" trees, but if they did and were "respectable", they would show that respect to the tree, the environment around the tree, and the micro-ecosystems involved, so I woulod haveno problem with them.

The surest way to give Arborists a black eye, is for arm chair intellectuals to throw insults and antagonize those who actually work and perform their aerial skills.

MD Vaden, you are one of the great hypocrytes of all time. Your posts, and threads do nothing to further the industry you claim to love, but only accomplish a narcistic need to justify yourself in amongst professionals that you have really shown nothing but contempt for. At least you have accomplished one thing...demonstrating the definition of pompousness.

I do not Rec climb, but I do believe strongly that those who do, do not harm our industry, and as a matter of fact, they open the public eye to those who actually further our industry, by demonstrating the correct methods of entering trees without damage, and demonstrating care for the trees they love. I would like to see the rec climbs as a public sport such as x-treme snow-boarding or the like.

But I am sure you will either not answer this, or try to justify yourself again quoting books, and esteeming yourself as a professional. I want to congratulate you on the success of your troll.

 

[OTG BOSTON]

Tree co had it right with his original post in this thread.

 

[oldugly]

OTG
Treeco usually gets it right. Sometimes I don't agree. but he usually is not pretentious and gets his ideas accross right. I agree here, he had it right the first time. MD just was able to try to refocus everyone's attn. from his original post to side tracks about what harm might be done to the trees. His original statement was about the industry itself, nothing to do with the actual health of the trees involved.

The real harm to the industry is the arm chair critics who theorize and hypthesize ways to propagate their own over-educated and under-worked theories into other's lives. Criticizing methods and practices of real professionals can somehow make themselves feel professional themselves.

Don't get me wrong, there are methods and practices I criticize also, but I usually do so from the top of an impossible removal, not from an armchair in my office.

 

[treemandan]

I don't agree.

I don't think what rec climbers do has any reflection on arboriculture or on Certified Arborist.

I'm thinking a large part of what bothers you about the rec climbers is related to the fact that you are not a climber.

What did he say? What exactly doesn't he agree with? Just the rec climbing or the other thing too?

Hold on , hold on, don't shoot. You are a better man than that to think I am headed to bash you right now Dan, just looking for some clarity.

Ok , we all know no one likes Vaden cause he don't climb BUT does he say any else?

When they tried to stop me to get a permit to ride my bike in the park I just rode off laughing. That was a good while ago. I guess if I were to go backwoods hiking I would need a permit to stay with in the law.

While no one wants to be told he can't anything with out a permit ( and surely we get indignant when we have to pay for a permit) it truly is a viable way to monitor the situation. Does anyone agree that some situations be monitored?
building
hunting
fishing
driving
riding a bike? What's next?

Yes, even I got mad at Vaden for being an armchair arborist and I hope he knows that. But its true, you should get a permit if you want to partake in activities on public land. Especially tree climbing, its good to tell the authorities where you are is case you don't come back when you are supposed. They will come look for you. Now nodody here is an authority cause if you were you would have a stack of permits to hand out along with another stack of citations for those that don't have permits.

They did want to kick us bikers out of the park and we, the renagades with no permits, did not help ourselves by not complying. I realized this so I got into the organization the gave out the permits and worked to help reduce and repair the wear and tear I made. Also, since I was a volunteer I didn't need no stinking permit to ride my bike in the park anymore. That's like one of those WIN/ WIN things we always hear so much about.


I don't like the people who say " never chop down another redwood" and I don't like the people who cut them down uncontrolably. I don't like people who think they can blast through the park with out a permit. YO! COMERE DUDE! WHERE'S YOR PERMIT!!?
To be honest our band of volunteers " sold" more permits than any other and we used to be the renagades.

 

[oldugly]

Again we get sidetracked by Mr. Vaden's personal agenda of self satisfying ego-stroking.
Treemandan-- The original post had nothing to do with permits, or tree health, or any of the issues raised since. The original question was whether it gave (rec climbing) aboriculture a "black eye".

Treeco responded to that aspect and I agree with him.

I agree with your point of permits, I agree with preserving historical trees, and even agree with the control of access to public lands, and the restricting recreational climbing in these areas. I just do not think in any way it damages our industry...as a matter of fact I believe recreational climbing, be it controlled or not, benefits the industry if it is done properly, and tree damage kept to a minimum.

The benefits include the public awareness of trees, and the tree-health concerns when IMPROPERLY climbed. Way too much of the public sees a forest as a forest and not as an ecosystem consisting of the largest organizims on earth, together with the smallest. The benefit of publicizing recreational climbing, would be tremendous.

 

[treemandan]

Again we get sidetracked by Mr. Vaden's personal agenda of self satisfying ego-stroking.
Treemandan-- The original post had nothing to do with permits, or tree health, or any of the issues raised since. The original question was whether it gave (rec climbing) aboriculture a "black eye".

Treeco responded to that aspect and I agree with him.

I agree with your point of permits, I agree with preserving historical trees, and even agree with the control of access to public lands, and the restricting recreational climbing in these areas. I just do not think in any way it damages our industry...as a matter of fact I believe recreational climbing, be it controlled or not, benefits the industry if it is done properly, and tree damage kept to a minimum.

The benefits include the public awareness of trees, and the tree-health concerns when IMPROPERLY climbed. Way too much of the public sees a forest as a forest and not as an ecosystem consisting of the largest organizims on earth, together with the smallest. The benefit of publicizing recreational climbing, would be tremendous.

oof, not to side track again but I thought the whole tree climbing thing was to selfishly satisfy our overly stroked egos It sure seems that way sometimes.
I actually don't know what you just said up there. It sounded like you are argueing with yourself.
Is rec climbing arboriculture? By definition of arboriculture it kinda does. No?
So you say you agree with the idea of rec climbing not affecting the world of arboriculture? You did say that? AND you saythe benifit of publicizing rec climbing would be tremendous? I don't follow, you lost me.
Now listen, a lot of people might go on the defense right now and see what a just said as a personal attack. Not my intention BUT I think what you just said is full of contradiction and I am a little confused.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

What if the rec climber is not an arborist at all but a former rock climber? Would this practice still (somehow) give arborists a black eye?

Did you through all the replies?

Seems like many or most angles have already been covered once or twice.

It's one of those rather old threads that covered a lot of ground and went by the wayside with time.

 

[oldugly]

Treemandan-
I will try to explain myself because I do NOT want any confusion.

On the issue of recreational climbing giving arboriculture a "black eye" I disagree as they are two separate entities, however closely related they may seem. The recreational climber does nothing negative at all to the industry.

On the issue of restricting access to historical, or protected areas, absolutley, I agree with you, these areas are protected for a reason and should remain so. On the issues of permits etc. I have no argument with you at all.

On the separate issue of whether recreational climbing is damaging to the trees, I feel that most recreational climbers treat their conquests with great respect. Therefore they would take care not to damage them. That being said, permits and restricted access to preserve them is a must.

Separately from all of that, I brought up the issue that if more recreational climbing took place, and was made more public, it would have the reverse affect that MD had attributed. (which he had said it has a negative affect on the industry)

I feel it would raise public awareness of the value, individuality, and challenge of trees, subsequently benefitting the industry by demonstration of the proper methods of tree climbing versus the standard scare strap and spike.

Separately from all of that, I was trying to say that the most damaging aspect to the tree industry is egotistical arm chair arborists taking pot shots at those with the skill and science to actually do the job, and therefore alienating those people, (if they do need to improve their methods), from any desire to learn modern tree care methods. I would rather take in account where someone is in their methods, and try to help them improve, rather than write them off and criticize their persons, companies, or intelligence.
(This had nothing to do with the aspect of recreational climbing, only the aspect of what gives the industry a black eye)

I realize I ran the subjects together somewhat and I can understand the confusion.

I tend to ramble my thoughts together sometimes and I apologize that I am not a polished writer.

 

[treeseer]

On the issue of restricting access to historical, or protected areas, absolutley, I agree with you, these areas are protected for a reason ...
On the separate issue of whether recreational climbing is damaging to the trees, I feel that most recreational climbers treat their conquests with great respect. Therefore they would take care not to damage them. That being said, permits and restricted access to preserve them is a must.

Separately from all of that, I brought up the issue that if more recreational climbing took place, and was made more public, ...

I feel it would raise public awareness of the value, individuality, and challenge of trees, subsequently benefitting the industry by demonstration of the proper methods of tree climbing versus the standard scare strap and spike.

Separately from all of that, I was trying to say that the most damaging aspect to the tree industry is egotistical arm chair arborists taking pot shots at those with the skill and science to actually do the job, and therefore alienating those people,...I apologize that I am not a polished writer.

you wrote quite well .

I shoulda posted the article in a new thread; this one's torn up by emotion.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

you wrote quite well .

I shoulda posted the article in a new thread; this one's torn up by emotion.

He writes okay.

I don't think he totally traced the origin of where the topic stemmed from, which would be a professional tree worker - Certified Arborist - simultaneously advertising their videos of illegal climbing of protected forests, while also displaying their certified arborist status online.

It would sort of be like a licensed physician displaying videos online of illegal medical practices in one state, while displaying their licensed title and practicing legally in another state.

It's got virtually nothing to do with the general day to day hobby of recreational climbing.