QTRA... V.T.A..... Or Lantra Pro tree inspection

[Andy Clark]

how do you mean apples with pears tony?

 

are they not all for the same purpose?

 

Oh and i am familiar with VTA, its more wether i should do the QTRA or the lantra next!

 

The three applications you mention HD, are all very different and look at different approaches to tree/hazard assessment.......

 

QTRA concentrates more on calculating the associated risk level, by giving most consideration to the target zone...... Hence why non arbs can use the system, as it requires very little in the way of Arb/tree knowledge......

where as VTA looks more towards assessing the structural integrity of the tree, and gives consideration to the likelhood/probability of a failure part.

 

LANTRA PTI "sort of" covers both angles, but tends to deal more with the practical methodology of actually carrying out the inspection. It is a recognise level 3 academic qual though, so if you don't have such things as ND or tech.cert, it's a good way to tick that box.

 

 

To be honest, if yo're looking to use any of these, i'd also give serious consideration to looking at tree valuation and appraisal methods too. Things like CAVAT, the CTLA method, or even Helliwell......... Condeming a tree based on it's hazard/failiure likelyhood is one thing, but when you know the value of the tree also, you do tend to look at makng other recomendations than just "Fell, and re-plant with similar species".

 

 

To echo Bundles comments, quals are only as good as the person using them. All these are a good starting block to build a foundation of knowledge and understanding, but it's knowing how and when you apply the relevant system which is the hard part.

 

It's wise to remember that it's a similar principle to NPTC cs units...... yes, they prove competency, but being competent to use a chainsaw doesn't mean you're an Arborist..... it just means you're competent to use a chainsaw.

Edited January 20, 2010 by Andy Clark
typo

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Guys, all great posts and helping massivley, and i really appreciate your time on this.

 

I wasnt trying to deconstruct anything, far from it. I just do not have finances to waste on less worthwhile aspects of my training. I am doing all this training because I am not taken seriously within this business, and never will be till I have joined the boys club of this and that letter after my name. I am a VERY capable guy though, of that you can be assured!

 

The point about Lantra being a level three qual is interesting, and makes that my next goal, the qtra was always going to be my last priority, getting any other assesment modules a mere formality as far as I am concerned.

 

I think there are a lot of variables in the target calculator, too many realisticaly. A static target is one thing, but a moving one is incalcuble, surely?

[Bundle 2]

Guys, all great posts and helping massivley, and i really appreciate your time on this.

 

I wasnt trying to deconstruct anything, far from it. I just do not have finances to waste on less worthwhile aspects of my training.

 

You may think that you are not deconstructing but I would take issue with this in light of the above comment....?Just saying you arnt doesnt make it not so if you can follow my meaning...

 

Hama:"I think there are a lot of variables in the target calculator, too many realisticaly"

 

 

My advice is to not go there mate...Until you grasp the underlying mathematics you will continue to misrepresent the QTRA method.

It is only my opinion. For me it is head & shoulders above any other system out there, and as you know there are a few. They remain muddled and confused and utterly without a tangible explanation to all but arboriculturalists. Whilst we owe a debt of gratitude to the work of Matheny & Clark for example, development of a system that is both usable and "good 4 the industry" is desirable. This is what I believe the QTRA system is able to deliver.

I am not trying to persuade your goodself to invest in this before PTI . I think though that you will benefit considerably from attending the whole "licensing" process.

It is a bit like walking up the mountain. Everytime you think the summit is upon you. it infact gives way to another climb. So it is with the system. There is alot more to the method than you may think. It can be used in ways that only serve to consolidate your appreciation of the "neat" system and principles that you come back to over and again. Reassuringly sensible in a sea of otherwise white noise frankly. Thats enough waxing lyrical for anyone I think!

[benedmonds]

Remember the PTI is not designed to teach you to do tree inspections but to assess that you can. You will lean stuff but won't pass unless you already know your stuff, especially fungi ident.

 

The Mike Ellison VTA course teaches you about VTA but you don't get a qualification.

 

I've not done the QTRA so can't comment..

 

I'd do the PTI if you think you know what your doing or the VTA then the PTI if your not so confident!

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Remember the PTI is not designed to teach you to do tree inspections but to assess that you can. You will lean stuff but won't pass unless you already know your stuff, especially fungi ident.

 

The Mike Ellison VTA course teaches you about VTA but you don't get a qualification.

 

I've not done the QTRA so can't comment..

 

I'd do the PTI if you think you know what your doing or the VTA then the PTI if your not so confident!

 

I did the VTA with Claus, my fungi Ident skills are legend!

 

I never meant to "deconstruct" but i have to "priortise" my funds, however QTRA may well now seem the better "next option.

 

I basicaly need to get "up and running" with VTA assesments as a side line, slow build up to consulting full time. I dont believe I require "further training" as far as assesing a trees potentials, but i definatley need training in "provability" "legitimacy" "eligibility" "quantification" and writing things in a professional report!

[Bart]

Whent on Mike Ellison's VTA course last year, thought it was great

[Amelanchier]

I never meant to "deconstruct" but i have to "priortise" my funds, however QTRA may well now seem the better "next option.

 

Despite most people suggesting the LANTRA PTI?

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Despite most people suggesting the LANTRA PTI?

 

are they?

 

I will have to look over the whole thread, assumed it was about fifty fifty?

 

and they said I will learn nothing from lantra, only asseses what you already know.

 

So tony, if you was me what would you do first? Lantra or the QTRA?

[Amelanchier]

When I was in your position, I did the LANTRA PTI first! It's worth noting that its the only qualification that exists that assesses your ability to inspect, diagnose and specify recommedations. (Perhaps also the PD Arb in a roundabout way?)

 

Indeed, given the fact that such an assessment exists - I wonder if it would not be 'reasonable' in the eyes of the law to expect you to have undertaken and passed it prior to inspecting trees? Maybe, maybe not...

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

You may think that you are not deconstructing but I would take issue with this in light of the above comment....?Just saying you arnt doesnt make it not so if you can follow my meaning...

 

Hama:"I think there are a lot of variables in the target calculator, too many realisticaly"

 

 

My advice is to not go there mate...Until you grasp the underlying mathematics you will continue to misrepresent the QTRA method.

It is only my opinion. For me it is head & shoulders above any other system out there, and as you know there are a few. They remain muddled and confused and utterly without a tangible explanation to all but arboriculturalists. Whilst we owe a debt of gratitude to the work of Matheny & Clark for example, development of a system that is both usable and "good 4 the industry" is desirable. This is what I believe the QTRA system is able to deliver.

I am not trying to persuade your goodself to invest in this before PTI . I think though that you will benefit considerably from attending the whole "licensing" process.

It is a bit like walking up the mountain. Everytime you think the summit is upon you. it infact gives way to another climb. So it is with the system. There is alot more to the method than you may think. It can be used in ways that only serve to consolidate your appreciation of the "neat" system and principles that you come back to over and again. Reassuringly sensible in a sea of otherwise white noise frankly. Thats enough waxing lyrical for anyone I think!

 

my emphasis highlighted.

 

I dont know why everyones up on the defence! I have to ask these things dont I? I mean asking Mike himself I would get a biassed opinion! a sale is a sale!

 

I now understand why you are required to take books with you on the LANTRA, its a test not so much of what you can do but in your ability to use the books to work out the situation and prove you CAN.

 

So am I right in asuming that the QTRA is broken down, you do VTA training seperatley to the target calculation stuff, good earner.

 

does anyone have an opinion toward only using my VTA (Claus mattheck)training? is this not sufficient?