Honestly, aside from what I think anyone else wants from me, the CLT has more meat to it from an overall entire landscape care point of view. My particular CLT that is. There are a few different CLTs.
Portland Community College's CLT is one entire year of college. That certification will cover almost anything the Certified Arborist exam can throw at its landscape technician with its plant ID, tree care, horticulture, soils and pesticide classes.
That CLT program covers up to 300 trees and shrubs for ID, turfgrass ID and care, Irrigation, and a whole bunch of other classes.
When I got my CLT years ago, I could have passed the Arborist exam using about 25% of my CLT training. But I didn't really care for the ISA certificate back then.
But in recent years, the ISA certification and test seems to have grown in leaps and bounds, to where I am proud to say that I have achieved that certification also.
Some people said I would "ace" the ISA test. But from what I was aware of, I knew it would be work. And part of my reason for studying was to learn more, not just take the exam.
And it was not easy by any means. The study guide is one of the best designed pieces of work I have seen.
Honestly, I can say that my work habits and safety habits have already improved just from studying and reviewing the material for the ISA test.
From a trees only point of view, I'd give the ISA certification 15% over the worth of a one year college CLT right now. And as a holder of both certifications, I'd say that I respect each fairly equally.
In general, I think that the average arborist is a bit more ambitious to achieve top notch plant care that the average landscape technician.
That may be why the term "landscaper" is has not been on my business card. When people hear the word "arborist", they almost automatically associate the term with quality and responsibility.
