Future of our industry...Essential Arb article

[Paul Barton]

Interesting article about the 'future of our industry' and the trade bodies/institutes that support and represent us.

 

What do you think?

Johnston 2011 Future of the Arboricultural Industry.pdf

[Amelanchier]

I think 34 views and no replies tells you everything you need to know...

[armybloke]

I think 34 views and no replies tells you everything you need to know...

 

Tony you responded at such high velocity others have not had an opportunity to digest what Paul has offered for debate

 

It has promoted discussion here Paul and I will let you know our thoughts.

 

It is an agenda item we should not dismiss troops

[RobArb]

I haven't had chance to read it yet as I can't download it from my phone, I'm sure the same is for many others

 

Sent from Rob's GalaxySII

[shrub]

I think the article is absolutely right.At present the arboriculture profession is diffused by the number of different organisations purporting to be the professional voice and to gain better credibility,amalgamation into one recognisable body is a logical step and more importantly will be recognised readily in other professional circles and government.

[David Humphries]

Ofcourse we (as an industry) need one coherent & weighty voice to focus around. But there's no getting away from the fact that we are many different branches with that one industry. Surely one representative would get too watered down and could not hold the expertise in one hand of cards???

 

I'm in essence a Tree Officer & as such am a member of a number of bodies (including the London Tree Officers Association) but as a large part of my remit is open space/ecology I don't actualy have much to do with planning issues, where perhaps 90% of the other members of that association do.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is (where possible) we all need to get involved across the spectrum, as much as we can, and stop looking over at the other associations and 'wondering' what they're doing !

 

 

 

.

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

When I have read the piece i shall return, tony S, dont make such assumptions!

[Arbmatic]

I am an outsider looking in but deal with the concerns on a regular basis.

My observations are these.

 

1) Who are these bodies representing to? If it is government then, they will always have less impact than more science (I use the term loosely) based organisations such as the Forestry Commision. If there was weight from other scientific organisations such as Universities then these would be taken into consideration, but there is a lack of targeted research in Europe that is arboriculture specific, so forestry will always have the upper hand. 'Trade Organisations' are always seen as second tier, behind research and independent bodies. Perhaps even third tier with the advent of the online petitions.

 

2) There is nothing wrong with having many bodies within the same industry, all other industries have many bodies representing different aspects and views, but there lies the arboriculutral problem. All organisations trying to be everything and fighting to be the most important.

 

3) Europe. Most environmental bills and law comes in some shape or form from Europe these days and have done so for decades. So instead of looking inwardly, the arboricultural industry should look outwardly.There is no point in worring about things like Chartered Status and inwardly thinking ideas when the next update to European Environmental Laws will severely restrict your working practices.

 

4) Every day the same old things comes around, I can't get rid of my wood chip, my fuel bill is too high, what is this fungus, etc, etc. A trade organisation that represents its members would worry about these things first, and then look at the wider issues. Any house must have deep, firm, foundations.

 

Also there is currently too much distance between the trade organisations and education and research. It worries me that some of the best training is offered outside of the education sector (I still think some of the organisations do a good job). There is a proud tradition in this country for education in colleges and universities, just as students should be encouraged to take up training and qualifications, academics should be encouraged to get involved in arboriculture.

 

5) What do they offer. If an organistion only offers you tea and cake and a posh looking badge, then unless you like tea and cake, don't bother. The only badge you should need is your qualifications (however humble) and a big list of references from happy customers. The rest is down to educating the public and encouraging us all to keep learning, which is where trade organisations can help. And I mean proper training with certification, program plans etc.

 

6) Personally I think you are already members of the best trade organisation, ARBTALK!! There are some very important people dip into this site from time to time and with good reason. I think I am going to put ATM on my cv (Arbtalk Member) from now on.

 

Good on yer Steve and keep it up.

[Le Sanglier]

I am an outsider looking in but deal with the concerns on a regular basis.

My observations are these.

 

1) Who are these bodies representing to? If it is government then, they will always have less impact than more science (I use the term loosely) based organisations such as the Forestry Commision. If there was weight from other scientific organisations such as Universities then these would be taken into consideration, but there is a lack of targeted research in Europe that is arboriculture specific, so forestry will always have the upper hand. 'Trade Organisations' are always seen as second tier, behind research and independent bodies. Perhaps even third tier with the advent of the online petitions.

 

2) There is nothing wrong with having many bodies within the same industry, all other industries have many bodies representing different aspects and views, but there lies the arboriculutral problem. All organisations trying to be everything and fighting to be the most important.

 

3) Europe. Most environmental bills and law comes in some shape or form from Europe these days and have done so for decades. So instead of looking inwardly, the arboricultural industry should look outwardly.There is no point in worring about things like Chartered Status and inwardly thinking ideas when the next update to European Environmental Laws will severely restrict your working practices.

 

4) Every day the same old things comes around, I can't get rid of my wood chip, my fuel bill is too high, what is this fungus, etc, etc. A trade organisation that represents its members would worry about these things first, and then look at the wider issues. Any house must have deep, firm, foundations.

 

Also there is currently too much distance between the trade organisations and education and research. It worries me that some of the best training is offered outside of the education sector (I still think some of the organisations do a good job). There is a proud tradition in this country for education in colleges and universities, just as students should be encouraged to take up training and qualifications, academics should be encouraged to get involved in arboriculture.

 

5) What do they offer. If an organistion only offers you tea and cake and a posh looking badge, then unless you like tea and cake, don't bother. The only badge you should need is your qualifications (however humble) and a big list of references from happy customers. The rest is down to educating the public and encouraging us all to keep learning, which is where trade organisations can help. And I mean proper training with certification, program plans etc.

 

6) Personally I think you are already members of the best trade organisation, ARBTALK!! There are some very important people dip into this site from time to time and with good reason. I think I am going to put ATM on my cv (Arbtalk Member) from now on.

 

Good on yer Steve and keep it up.

 

Enjoyed all that but especially this paragraph.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi all,

 

I've adopted a 'watching brief' on this post....needless to say I didn't have to watch for long, ha!

 

Why is that?...dis-illusionment?....complacency?....a combination?, or summat else?

 

Perhaps, to some extent, and just 'thinking out loud' here so don't shoot me down too hard, but is the organisational fragmentation, to some extent, a reflection of an insular industry where there's a perception we don't need a voice?

 

The Association, whilst not everybody's "cup-of-tea", but then with many, no cups of tea (nor cake!) would appeal, does TRY to accomodate and assist all working within the industry, wherever that may be...in the tree, on the ground, in the office or committee room. I know we don't always get it right and I wonder if sometimes we spread our efforts too thinly and hence perhaps appear ineffective?

 

Dunno, just some thoughts out loud as I said but we really do want to help make your day-to-day job easier / more effective / not so isolated...so wheer do I roll up mi sleeves first?

 

Cheers all n any feedback much appreciated.

 

Take care out there..!

 

Paul..