QTRA registered?

[arb culture]

Hi Andy

 

Rough/smooth, I will debate tree risk assessment with anyone, but not as long as they insist on anonymity. You might be suprised, but I think that QTRA benefits most from constructive critisism, which in turn ususally arises out of a negative critisism. The problem with the post to which I responded is that it wasn't a really a critique of ony kind,

 

You are right my comments were not a critique, just opinions. However, they are the well educated opinions of someone with over 15 years of experience in arb based on an unbiased assessment of the many tree surveys that I have seen, made after discussion with lots of people (many of who have done your training), and also after reading many of the background papers on the subject.

 

They are also the honest opinions of someone who has no financial interest in the validity (or otherwise) of QTRA.

 

At the moment I'm not really interested in a debate on the minutae of your system. I would have enjoyed a debate of this kind a few years ago, but since then I've heavily researched QTRA (among various other systems) and I honestly believe it to be very poor indeed. If others feel otherwise they are free to do so - it is no concern of mine.

 

Why are you so reluctant to discuss QTRA with someone anonymous?

[David Humphries]

Why are you so reluctant to discuss QTRA with someone anonymous?

 

Why the provocation?

 

Seems to me Mike is being open with his reasoning for tackling a point of interest raised against his systems.

 

Maybe a pm to him to let him know who you are and things can stay cordial.

Which is obviously what we all would like to see here.

 

We don't really want the silly nonsence associated with hidden identities that has plagued other forums.

 

regards

 

 

Monkey-D, aka.....David Humphries

 

 

.

[arb culture]

Why the provocation?

 

Seems to me Mike is being open with his reasoning for tackling a point of interest raised against his systems.

 

Maybe a pm to him to let him know who you are and things can stay cordial.

Which is obviously what we all would like to see here.

 

We don't really want the silly nonsence associated with hidden identities that has plagued other forums.

 

regards

 

 

Monkey-D, aka.....David Humphries

 

 

.

 

I wasn't aware that I was being provocative in my question about anonymity.

 

It's probably an issue for a seperate thread, but this was a genuine question, I don't understand why there is a reluctance to discuss an issue (any issue) with someone just because they wish to remain anonymous.

 

By the way, I don't know what silly nonesense has plagued other threads, but if you know of a good reason for not allowing anonymity then let us know. It might be time for Arbtalk to change forum rules.

[Amelanchier]

I think Mike's stance is perfectly reasonable.

[Amelanchier]

It's probably an issue for a seperate thread...

 

I agree.

[common lime]

I finally did the QTRA training this year, I have wanted to do this training since, I attended the ISA UKI Risk Seminar (in 2004 or 2005?) where both JFL, Mike and Dave did talks on Tree Risk Assessment. I have a lot of respect for QTRA one of the reasons for this is because the people I, respect in the industry respect the system and have done the training. However there are weakness in any system and the weakness in this system is the same weakness in ALL the Tree Risk Evaluation methods YOU and ME. It is our skills, knowledge and experience or lack of them that will determine the strength and weakness of any of the Tree Risk Evaluation methods. Therefore, in order for me to improve these, I decided to spend my money on QTRA and VTA with Mike and it was worth every penny. I doubt that, I will do many if any QTRA surveys because BS5837 is keeping me busy at the moment but, I am very glad that I did the training and in my opinion it was worth every penny. I would suggest to anyone to go on the system you might not fully support it but you will learn something new about trees. As we all do when we attended this events it is the coming together of all the delegates tree experience that is just as valuable if not more so than the knowledge of tutor, talker etc.

 

IMHO, to dismiss QTRA training on a Chinese whisper is very short sighted. This system is being used by many a Highway Authority and is often specified in tender documents for Highway Tree Risk Audits.

[skyhuck]

Why the provocation?

 

 

.

 

Do you feel this smile ":confused1:" is provocative David???

 

I use it a lot, to me it just means I'm asking a question, as I don't understand something.

[David Humphries]

Do you feel this smile ":confused1:" is provocative David???

 

I use it a lot, to me it just means I'm asking a question, as I don't understand something.

 

 

No, can't say that I do Dave

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[skyhuck]

No, can't say that I do Dave

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.