Yank wondering about saw training

[computeruser]

Hello. New to the site and to the idea of receiving training/certification in saw (and apparently chipper and hedge trimmer, too?) operation. I've read over a bunch of threads here, as well as links to some of the providers of the training, trying to get a better sense of what the classes/certifications teach the saw operator, what the course material looks like, and stuff like that.

 

As you may or may not know, the idea of being trained in saw operation in any formal setting is practically unheard of over here, except for certain specific sorts of cutters - some commercial loggers, folks cutting firewood on certain federal lands, or people volunteering with groups working on US Forest Service land (clearing trails, removing invasive tree species, etc., for example - and most folks, even professionals, are self-taught or learn from coworkers, friends, and the like. After hearing about the training/certification requirements you guys have from UK based folks who frequent another arborist website, I got curious about learning a bit more about how your training works, whether it is beneficial from the point of view of the saw operator, and what it teaches.

 

With that in mind, a couple questions:

 

1. What do these classes look like? I am envisioning a guy shows up with a saw and some protective gear, presumably he then sits in a classroom for a while during the theory portion of the class, and later he goes out and cuts things under supervision?

 

2. Is there any source for free versions of the printed material that these courses supply, or would anyone be willing to share some of that with me (I know, an outlandish request with only 2 posts on the site...but hey, had to ask)? I'm interested in seeing exactly what is being taught and under which course heading/at which level of operator proficiency, so I can compare it to what is being presented in the U.S. Forest Service certification program and in a couple of the seminal texts on tree work here in the US.

 

3. Apart from meeting a licensing or insurance requirement, are these classes something that people feel is useful, or just a bureaucratic hoop to jump through before getting right back to doing what they were doing before?

 

4. What is the pass/fail rate for participants? Is this something that anybody with a pulse will pass for having bothered to show up and pay the fee, or is there actually some meaningful level of competence that is required for a passing mark?

 

Thanks for any input you may be willing to offer in response to these questions, and the others I will surely come up with later!

[Jon Hartley]

Have a look here

 

NPTC | QualificationsForestry & Arboriculture

 

This is the main qualification route taken in the UK.

 

Hope it helps

[Reddog]

Computeruser, don't know if you found what you were looking for.

 

In the US this is a good program for Chainsaw training.

 

Game of Logging

 

With large enough groups you can bring an instructor in for training. But you will need a number of trees to be felled for each student.

 

It takes a lot of grief from the west coast folks, but it gives very good basics to then build off.

[WorcsWuss]

Firstly, welcome to the forum.

In terms of content and context, when I did my CS units (in 1999) it was given by a qualified trainer to a small group, in my case me and 3 experienced woodmen, in the field (or woodland anyway!). There was no classroom work (that's for diploma type qualifications). We were showed how to maintain a saw, cross cut fell etc and then practiced under supervision. After a few days practice and tuition we were them formally assessed (in those days by the same guy) and if we passed, we gained the relevant CS module qualification. At the time, for someone with limited experience I found it very worthwhile, I carry the basic principals with me to this day and I still recommend the courses.

While I agree in part that it can be a little bureaucratic, I can't deny that it was worthwhile. I've learned a lot since then by myself without qualification, climbing for instance, and I wouldn't like to be told I couldn't climb because I don't have the right tickets, but the basic safety and principles are invaluable.

Someone I know is out in Oz and posted a photo on Facebook of him spiked up a tree dismantling it. I wouldn't trust him to dismantle garden furniture, he's not had any formal training nor is he experienced. It concerns me that he's not safe, but apparently there is no qualification system required over there.

I do believe that at least some formal training is essential. I'm amazed that someone can use a chainsaw without understanding about kickback or what the chain brake is for.

There's a happy medium I'm sure between where we are in the uk and places like the us, but it's a case of finding it.

That is probably unlikely to happen though!

 

Hope this helps!

[agg221]

Also worth noting that not everyone in the UK is formally trained/qualified. A private individual can buy and operate any chainsaw they like without paperwork. They can't always buy it new via a dealer due restrictions imposed by the manufacturer, but there's nothing illegal about buying a saw from ebay and using it. If it's not for hire or reward you are covered in the UK under a standard household contents policy, even if you use it on someone else's land (with permission).

 

The limitation is more when you want to work on certain sites, get certain jobs or be covered by certain commercial insurance policies which may impose restrictions.

 

Alec

[Quickthorn]

On the last two questions:

 

It's a legal requirement in the UK (and the EU I believe) that anyone in a work situation should be trained and competent to use any equipment. We also have an Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) to these regulations that mentions chainsaws specifically, stating that operators should hold a certificate of competence before they start work (with some exceptions).

 

Stavros' link doesn't seem to work so here is a list of NPTC assessment schedules for chainsaws: c&G Forestry and Arboriculture Level 2. CS0960 and CS0961 would be the very minimum, I'd think, and it might be worth you looking at the last one in particular:CS31 Fell & Process Small trees . Those schedules would be what a candidate would be assessed on.

 

I'm sure there must be an assessor on here that can give an idea of how many pass or fail, but I'd guess 15-20% of candidates would fail on their first attempt.

 

Personally, I much prefer a system where some sort of formal training and assessment is compulsory (although whether or not it's got out of hand here is another matter). It may seem bureaucratic, but the reason we've got to where we are is that, under the old way of learning informally and through experience, too many people were being killed or seriously injured early on in their career because they made mistakes that would nowadays be seen as elementary.

Edited December 8, 2012 by Quickthorn

[computeruser]

Thanks for the responses. I did some reading and got some PMs with additional info and think I've got a god sense of the curriculum now. It seems good and useful, though the number of hours/days that each takes seems a bit excessive, especially for an operator with prior experience.

 

Reddog, I do know of GOL. It seems interesting, though I do like the idea of a unified, recognized standard rather than a proprietary training program. I'm not sure GOL would be recognized in the same way USDA FS sawyer certification might be, at least for insurance purposes, but maybe im overthinking it? Anyway, I also think we may have met once at Carvinmark's place, when he hosted a GTG. Does that ring a bell?

[Reddog]

Yup, same guy. You still in the greater Lansing area also?

 

From the Forestry/Logging side here in the Midwest and East coast, GOL is recognized with in the insurance groups well before the FS cert. From my dealings and checking the FS cert is only recognized for Government employees chainsaw training or wildland fire line jobs were you will be a Federal employee. If a private contractor here in the mid west or east coast it carries very little meaning.

 

My take from studying both is that GOL to a new user for this area gives a much stronger and safer starting point than the FS cert for what they will be dealing with.

The FS Cert was mainly written to cover West coast conditions and so at times does not seem the safer of the two for traits of hardwoods.

 

 

If you ever want to meet up for coffee and discuss this more just let me know, I would be more than happy to share my findings and hear what you have found.

 

Wally

[Dan Earp]

Just to quickly divert, but are the nptc qual's we have in the uk, relevant to the u.s /nz etc?

Thanks

[computeruser]

Interesting. Some of the municipal admin folks I deal with were put off by the "Game" part of the program title and seemed more interested in a govt program, but that might just be their ignorance showing or their preference for govt things over private ones. As it stands I'm fine cutting without any certification and have a solid track record for safety, but would like to get some at some point just to say I have it.

 

Yes, I'm still in Lansing. Not cutting for money any more, but doing lots of volunteer work for forest habitat, invasive species, and trail building and maintenance as a passtime. We ought to meet up sometime.

 

-Brandon