Arborists and Pattern Makers

[M.D. Vaden]

Seemed like a good time to split-off from this other thread on Achilles Heel...

http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=53422

As that progressed, it became apparent that some people think arboriculture and tree cutting are the same industry - which they are not. And taking a look back the past 40 years or so, "Arboriculture" today, may be a brand new profession.

There may be more truth to the statement than meets the eye, that Dr. Alex Shigo was the "father" of modern arboriculture. Its as if a new profession has been born.

What's with the "Pattern Maker" comment ?? :computer:


When I was 20, I had a roommate of near equal age. His name was Brian. A tall guy whom we nicknamed "The Great Dane" due to his family's Danish background (also turned me onto Aalborg Akvavit - say Allborg Aquaveet -with a beer chaser at dinner).

Anyway, his family, were highly skilled "Pattern Makers". Basically, they made stuff from wood, which was to be used in the mold process in manufacturing plants. Suppose you needed to make a metal part. They would make one exactly to scale from wood. Then that wood one was used to produce a mold for molten metal, to become the metallic part.

Not long ago, even when we were roommates, computers and new precision equipment replaced their profession: nearly entirely. A lot of those pattern makers ended up switching to custom made furniture.

I don't see arboriculture as an identical example, because arboriculture (modern) has not replaced tree cutting. But modern arboriculture is becoming so advanced, that its virtually an ADDITIONAL profession.

The advancement of modern arboriculture has advanced it to a level, that has basically moved tree care of the past, into a separate trade.

Arboricuture and tree cutting both require certain methods, but to compile them together presently, doesn't work. And I think that's what happened in the other thread, is that some people were reading "arborist" or "arboriculture" as if it was the same basic profession as tree cutting.

The pattern makers of the past, had to make a decision. Different situation, because they were elite at what they did. But to deal with evolution in culture, they either had quit the business, make furniture, or buy computerized machines and adapt.

 

[underwor]

I will agree that the professions have seen huge changes since my start on a DED removal crew for Davey in 1967. I see two rather large events that have driven this change. The first started about 1983, with Alex Shigo's big revelations about tree biology. Branch attachment, codominant stems, sealing vs. healing, all lead to changes such as elimination of flush cuts and painting of wounds.
In about 1992, the USFS, ISA, and NAA (TCIA) held sessions across the country to promote the concept of plant health care. This became the umbrella concept that covered IPM, soil management and tree care and looked at all operations as linked within a system. It took what we learned about tree biology and gave the framework for a holistic, proactive approach to arboriculture. This include tree care, along with care of all other parts of the environment that affected the plant's growth and health. It pointed out the relationships that exist in nature and why we need to incorporate as many of them as possible in our landscape management plan to help the tree grow as nature intended. A huge part of this was educating the customer about the power of the tree to maintain its strength and health, without the arborist having to alter it, until it reached the Tree 3 stage in Alex's model and started to shed parts that were not holding up their part of the bargain. Once it becomes a hazard, we need to eliminate these so that the tree can coexist with the population around it.

My thoughts.

 

[M.D. Vaden]

It's not really all that new, M.D.

The movement has been going on for almost 25 years now.

I didn't pull 40 years out of the hat for nothing

A few extra years just to be generous.

 

[Ekka]

It's about as profound as calling some-one an engineer.

So they drive a train or

design a superstructure that can withstand 500Km/h winds or

turn a shaft in a lathe or

hone a cylinder or

weld some channel together.

Within the trade there's more accurate and qualified tasks. Civil, construction, electrical, chemical, aero etc etc

You need to know what type of arborist you want.

 

[treeseer]

You need to know what type of arborist you want.

true, which is why ISA is looking at 6 new levels of certification, or at least "merit badge" type recognitions of training. Any member who got that survey and did not respond has zero right to complain later.

As for PHC and evolution, attached is one view on a good level to operate from.

 

[Bermie]

I still say that anyone up in a tree cutting bits off should be versed in arboriculture, the definition of which is 'The care, study and management of trees'
I cannot quite fathom a tree surgeon who does not understand codit, biomechanics, soil and plant science, pest and diseases, plant interactions...not necessarily a complete expert, but at least versed in the basics.
Equally a ground based arborist should be versed in and understand the specialities involved with good climbing and rigging issues, equipment and techniques.
Each one compliments the other!

 

[M.D. Vaden]

I still say that anyone up in a tree cutting bits off should be versed in arboriculture, the definition of which is 'The care, study and management of trees'
I cannot quite fathom a tree surgeon who does not understand codit, biomechanics, soil and plant science, pest and diseases, plant interactions...not necessarily a complete expert, but at least versed in the basics.
Equally a ground based arborist should be versed in and understand the specialities involved with good climbing and rigging issues, equipment and techniques.
Each one compliments the other!

Exactly !

It's really been just the past 1/2 year that I've really shifted to viewing "tree cutting" as a separate industry from "arboriculture". The art of rigging, climbing and cutting without a versatile educational / knowledge base is reasonable for the removal of trees. But "aboriculture" virtually demands that each person functioning as an arborist "hump it" for info. Most professions do - why not ours?

I was talking to my customer's neighbor today. Something he said about people brought to mind a "LASER".

Arboriculture and arborists will cause amazing results for tree care and recognition of our skills, if they function like a laser. The light is basically lined up and moving together in a direction almost simultaneously. If arborists "take up their burden", the profession will gain much more recognition.

At the same time, it will set a greater chasm between modern arborists and various tree cutters. There can still be the two trades, but the difference will be easier to distinguish.

 

[beowulf343]

So, Mario, was reading your website yesterday and noticed this paragraph. The last sentence seems odd.

"Speaking engagements are available to garden clubs, Master Gardeners and other groups. Mario Vaden can travel in Oregon to provide advice, slide shows and design plans. All available landscape services are found in the services page. We enjoy landscape renovation projects too. For trees high out of reach, we know reliable Portland tree services - check the Portland tree service page for a referral."

Please don't tell me you have to have "tree-cutters" do the tall trees.

Seemed like a good time to split-off from this other thread on Achilles Heel...

http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=53422

As that progressed, it became apparent that some people think arboriculture and tree cutting are the same industry - which they are not. And taking a look back the past 40 years or so, "Arboriculture" today, may be a brand new profession.

Obviously i was one of the guys you are talking about. So, what are the duties of an arborist and what are the duties of a "tree cutter"? What can an arborist do that a "tree cutter" can't do? Just curious because i work with arborists every day and they seem to do the exact same job i do. And yes, one of our arborists does removals every day, but the only difference is he runs a bucket and i climb. One of our arborists is a climbing trimmer. And the third one is our bidder. So what are they doing that they shouldn't be doing?

 

[M.D. Vaden]

So, Mario, was reading your website yesterday and noticed this paragraph. The last sentence seems odd....

"... All available landscape services are found in the services page. We enjoy landscape renovation projects too. For trees high out of reach, we know reliable Portland tree services - check the Portland tree service page for a referral."

Please don't tell me you have to have "tree-cutters" do the tall trees.

Since the link in that same paragraph of my HOME page goes directly to my internal referral page on my site for the Certified Arborist Roots and Shoots, I'd imagine that your answer is right at your fingertips. And if any reference to tree cutting, its for keyword strings for search engines.

The difference between a "tree cutter" who doesn't indulge in horticultural education, and a trained arborist rich in horticultural education, is not what some people think they see them doing with their eyes, but what's going on inside their head. Because the results of tree cutters and arborists are not really so similar when viewed by the educated eye.

Example: just like on a country club....

Toss any old "grass cutter" out there, and he probably can't tell whether the grass is mowed at 160/1000's of an inch, or 120/1000's of an inch, or realize the difference. But put a seriously trained golf course superintendent out there who has an Agronomy / Turf Management degree, with 5 to 20 years under his belt, and he'll know whether the green's mowing height is near .120" like it should be.

And he'll be able to tell by the folded or rolled vernation of the grass, and by it's pointed or row boat shaped tip, whether it's Agrostis stolonifera or Poa annua. Not to mention that one needs near 10 lbs of Nitrogen per 1000 square feet per year, and the other only needs 6 lbs. of Nitrogen per 1000 square feet per year. One species can get harmed by certain herbicides too, whereas the other will not take the same hit. So disaster to greens hinges on weed control and the presence or lack of intricate bits of knowledge.

With trees, its typically the "Tree Cutter" that would give wrong advice for Deodar Cedars defoliated on one side, because they didn't notice the weed free lawn on one side, and bark mulch on the other side. And the arborist with the richest education is the likely candidate to determine the right course of action / or refraining from action.

So you see ... if it's important to people in the United States that professionals are highly trained for scrawny little grass plants, why questions about arborists?

And the direction of professionalism is not digressing, but is advancing.

It was said in the other thread by someone... "Stay out of my trees"

But I know how to "Defend my Turf" as well as my trees

 

[Ekka]

Beowulf343

Over here your many talents would be recognized and appraised and you (providing no bad habits) would be credited for your expertise in relevant subjects pertaining to climbing, chainsaws, rigging (but there's some theory questions on this one for your own good), felling etc.

However the area many cutters/arborists/treeclimbers fall over in is the biology of trees, like how they grow, how they work etc. You may also have that knowledge yet seldom practice it because you mainly do TD's. That's OK, they're the other subjects you need to cover to be a well rounded arborist. No big deal.

I think what's being said here is that to be an arborist means more than cutting trees, and if Mary Public was getting advice on her tree from a non qualified tree cutter I'd be very cautious, however our programs a little different to ISA.

I'd be encouraging you to get certified/qualified and maybe charge ya boss more.:biggrinbounce2:

 

[treeseer]

if Mary Public was getting advice on her tree from a non qualified tree cutter I'd be very cautious, :

This I think is the crux of it--when anyone with a saw is asked for an opinion they are quick to look at it as a removal because that is the work they do. AND when any newbie is asked about tree risk they are quick to recite the bogus defect=hazard=removal syllogism.

It'd be like asking me a question about advanced rigging when I only know it at a basic level. Best for me to :censored: and refer to a pro or a publication.