Bs 3998

[Amelanchier]

I've just read my latest Arb Journal in which Lonsdale gives a summary of what might be in the new 3998.

 

I was just wondering how many of you guys and gals are familiar with the contents of the current BS??

 

I'd also like to arrange a group response from arbtalk members to the new standard when it becomes available for consultation.

[Steve Bullman]

 

I'd also like to arrange a group response from arbtalk members to the new standard when it becomes available for consultation.

 

i charge you with editing it:fight:

[christreeroot]

I think that will be great, usually its just consultants that consult on the BS standards, the problem being when its a standard for the working arborist they dont know what is correct for us and what is current etc etc etc......

 

As a member of UKTC forum i am some times shocked and appaled about comments and decisions stated on there, but if we as arborists at the dirty end of the biz dont make an effort to get involved in the consultation of new standards then we are to blame....

 

So yes lets get a response from the forum and get involved to enhance the industry for working arborists and of course the trees....:wave:

[Amelanchier]

i charge you with editing it:fight:

 

Consider it done, (if they ever get round to putting it out!!).

 

I think that will be great, usually its just consultants that consult on the BS standards, the problem being when its a standard for the working arborist they dont know what is correct for us and what is current etc etc etc......

 

As a member of UKTC forum i am some times shocked and appaled about comments and decisions stated on there, but if we as arborists at the dirty end of the biz dont make an effort to get involved in the consultation of new standards then we are to blame....

 

So yes lets get a response from the forum and get involved to enhance the industry for working arborists and of course the trees....:wave:

 

Exactly Chris. You've got to be in it to win it! I can't think of a larger more vocal collection of arbs than on here!!!!

[RPA]

I've just read my latest Arb Journal in which Lonsdale gives a summary of what might be in the new 3998.

 

I was just wondering how many of you guys and gals are familiar with the contents of the current BS??

 

I'd also like to arrange a group response from arbtalk members to the new standard when it becomes available for consultation.

 

I was going to buy it last year but i think you said it was being updated and not to waste money till the new ones out.

 

So I have been waiting, and waiting, etc, etc,.........

 

....... and yes I think a response from the forum would be a good plan

[treediver]

Im familiar with bs3998 (some v generous people out there!). Its quite a undertaking to condense an entire profession down to a few clear consise pages. Though nearly 20 years on its about time. I think there dragging there heels abit.

 

Heres an interesting clip I found posted a year ago!.

 

[ame]

[/ame]

[Bundle 2]

A group of seemingly intelligent people ... obviously !!

[Linda]

I was just wondering how many of you guys and gals are familiar with the contents of the current BS??

 

I know the 3998 by heart, and I think it's mainly bs...

 

I used to never recommend that work would be done to BS3998, but to the European Tree Pruning Guide and EAC A Guide to Safe Working Practice. (Download from http://www.eac-arboriculture.com/downloads/6881/6559/6707/safety_guide_2003_04_28.pdf)

[Amelanchier]

Thanks Linda. The Euro Tree Pruning guide is certainly more affordable!

 

Accessibility of information is, to my mind, fundamental to the future of this industry. Charging 80-90 quid for outdated info is unproductive, and puts the information out of the reach of the people who need it. However, I know that even with the review - the price will be the same.

 

The reason for my original post was to gauge what exposure people had to the original as a way of predicting exposure to the new standard. Progress hey?

[Laz]

I let this one slip, but actually looking at the draft I see huge potential problems for contractors using it as 'all works in compliance with BS3998'.

 

I agree Linda that the EAC guide is much more useful as a guide and checklist for clients.

 

I have tried to read BS3998 draft, but it is so complex, prescriptive and unbalanced, that I can no longer cross reference to it as a standard, and I can't even get to the end of it without falling asleep.

 

If I cross referenced to that in a contract, it just gives the client too much opportunity to query some semantic detail and not pay up. Better to avoid all that altogether. The EAC guide at least highlights the main points such as use of spurs, risk assessment etc and recommends suitable qualifications - after all, the BSI standard reads like a level 3 qualification curriculum, and is totally unecessary because it could just as easily say 'All work should be supervised by a level 3 qualified and competent person'.

 

Problem comes when it is promoted by industry or requested by clients.

 

We wouldn't need such a standard if those engaged in tree work were required to be suitably qualified, supervised and updated.

 

Again it shows how Chainsaw certs are insufficient as a measure of good Arboricultural practice.