Certified Tree Risk Assessor

[lxt]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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............

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.