Fully qualified tree surgeon

[Mick Dempsey]

4 minutes ago, spuddog0507 said:

when you say all up to rigging would that include cs32 34 35 ?

Dunno the numbers these days, been 25 years. But you know what I mean.

Use of a saw in a tree and rigging.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Mick Dempsey

[Con]

I think it's a very good question, and there should be a definitive answer to it, but there isn't. It would be good for all, if there was.

There's not many skilled, even semi skilled trades, where customers can't easily identify whether the trades person is qualified to undertake the work.

I would say its sensible to get the tickets relevant to the work you do, but that's not an answer to your question.  

I have never displayed 'fully qualifed' on any of my trucks partly for this reason.

I don't know what fully qualified is, and if challenged, either legally, or just by a customer on the doorstep, i would struggle to give the correct info. I haven't got every single cs module, not many have.

[Mark Bolam]

Same here, we just go with NPTC qualified and fully insured.

[Mark Bolam]

13 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

You’d have to have a recognised and broadly accepted definition of the term ‘arborist’ before you could hope to establish a path towards initial, partial or full ‘qualification.’

 

Are you, for example, including some / any theory / academic achievements within that term or solely focussing on the practical elements?

 

I’d suggest there’s a pretty strong argument that you can’t separate the 2 if you want to adopt the fullest sense of the term ‘arborist.’

 

Maybe the premise of the question is too loose?
 

How do you define arborist?

 

 

 

 

I think you’re blurring the edges here a bit between ‘Arborist’ and ‘Arboriculturist’ Kev.

 

The second is fully genned up, formal arb qualifications etc.

The first just uses the sharp stuff.

 

Plenty of crossover, like.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

6 minutes ago, Mark Bolam said:

I think you’re blurring the edges here a bit between ‘Arborist’ and ‘Arboriculturist’ Kev.

 

The second is fully genned up, formal arb qualifications etc.

The first just uses the sharp stuff.

 

Plenty of crossover, like.

I saw the other thread that’s running in parallel after Id written that Mark. 
 

Chris made a similar point but what both points highlight is that both the terms “arborist” and “arboriculturist” are (a) open to interpretation and (b) (perhaps more significantly) neither are properly understood within the industry let alone by Joe Public. 
 

Like, it’s no good trying to sell hard cased pre-embryonic protein sacks if all Maureen wants is eggs 😀

 

 

[eggsarascal]

4 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

I saw the other thread that’s running in parallel after Id written that Mark. 
 

Chris made a similar point but what both points highlight is that both the terms “arborist” and “arboriculturist” are (a) open to interpretation and (b) (perhaps more significantly) neither are properly understood within the industry let alone by Joe Public. 
 

Like, it’s no good trying to sell hard cased pre-embryonic protein sacks if all Maureen wants is eggs 😀

 

 

Banked.

[eggsarascal]

I don't get why anyone signs their van up, 'fullly insured'. You see the gas n leccy lads vans with gas safe and eic stickers, never seen one with fully insured.

[Mark Bolam]

Because plenty aren’t?

[Mark Bolam]

42 minutes ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

I saw the other thread that’s running in parallel after Id written that Mark. 
 

Chris made a similar point but what both points highlight is that both the terms “arborist” and “arboriculturist” are (a) open to interpretation and (b) (perhaps more significantly) neither are properly understood within the industry let alone by Joe Public. 
 

Like, it’s no good trying to sell hard cased pre-embryonic protein sacks if all Maureen wants is eggs 😀

 

 

Hence why I don’t use either!

[Mark Bolam]

Actually, that’s not true, we use ‘Arb Contractors’ when necessary.

 

Nice and grey....