Tree Survey Qualifactions??

[David oakman]

Who told you i was a man i could be a wo-man LOL:001_smile:

[Arbocop]

well well chaps this could go on and on, and is the sort of question i love, espesialy having trained people to inspect trees, been an expert witness on more than one ocasion, and oftern asked to review reports through mediation and complaints procedures.

 

there has been some interesting stuff in the courst of late that looks at experts for tree inspecting and also cout work

 

poll v batholemuew here

 

http://www.aie.org.uk/resources/case_law/aie_case_poll_barth.html

 

this was interesting for many resons not least of all the ding ding that kicked off regarding servay methods after the case, but more because in the judment there was a genneral acceptance of a tearing to the type of inspection and the person doing it.

 

ergo if u r a forester do that not arb inspections, and visa versa.........

 

as goes experts in court this was a daming inditment of an expert who got it all a bit higgldy pigldy and shows the need to prepair the judge was not happy it would apear

 

atkins v scott

 

http://www.aie.org.uk/resources/case_law/aie_case_atkins_scott.html

 

having said all of that it is important to go to the basic rule if you know what you are doing and are certain of your facts qualifications are not always the only whay to show competence to do so, a good freind of mine stood with an NC arb in court against a chap who had PD Arb bs this cert that, the latter got some information wrong and bang.... he lost for that side.

 

but lets remember what are quals about, well showing you have knowlge in a certain area, and the courts love them, your customer feel happyer with them, and you will help become all you can by gaining them, but never be temted to go out side your area of knowleg, forinstance it has been about 7 years since i did any real subsidance work, and befor that it did not form the main area of my work, so i would be very carful befor getting too involved with a case of that sort, but give me accident investigation dangerouse trees, im your man.....

 

on a final note in case you have not seen it the hse do give some guidance in a SIM to the LA EHO's as to how to look at the risk assessment side of tree hazard inspection

 

have a look hear

 

http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/sectors/ag_food/1_07_05.pdf

 

cheers all

 

kev

[Bundle 2]

Some interesting info mate.......This is taken from a QTRA tech note , references duly noted...

 

"Using the proposed system, the assessment of the same tree by different inspectors not trained

to a unifying standard has produced variable results, comparison of which indicates that a common

standard of training in tree inspection is required. Matheny and Clark (1994) asserted that "Training

of personnel in field assessment is absolutely essential" and "Perhaps the most important aspect of training is to develop consistent evaluation procedures, amongst individuals and over time".

Experience of the proposed system reinforces the view that the training of personnel involved in the inspection and assessment of trees is in need of standardisation. '

 

Further there appears to be an issue as to the language being used.....?

[RPA]

Back to the original thread (and a question I have still never got a clear answer to either)

 

I know all about the merits of experiance etc, etc, etc, etc, but in simple terms would a logical progression to show due diligence (in theoretical/certification terms) be Lantra basic survey leading to Lantra PTI?

[Amelanchier]

Back to the original thread (and a question I have still never got a clear answer to either)

 

I know all about the merits of experiance etc, etc, etc, etc, but in simple terms would a logical progression to show due diligence (in theoretical/certification terms) be Lantra basic survey leading to Lantra PTI?

 

Thats a huge gulf in knowledge IMO. You would be likely to need a intermediate qual such as the RFS Cert at Lvl 2 or an AA Tech Cert at Lvl 3.

 

The Lantra Basic is aimed at the layman. Whereas the PTI assumes a lot of lvl 3 (4?) knowledge.

 

Basically you haven't recieved a clear answer because there isn't one.

[RPA]

Thats a huge gulf in knowledge IMO. You would be likely to need a intermediate qual such as the RFS Cert at Lvl 2 or an AA Tech Cert at Lvl 3.

 

The Lantra Basic is aimed at the layman. Whereas the PTI assumes a lot of lvl 3 (4?) knowledge.

 

Basically you haven't recieved a clear answer because there isn't one.

 

Thanx for reply Tony.

 

I am RFS Cert Arb. Therefore should I do just PTI and not bother with Lantra basic?

[Amelanchier]

Yep. You don't need it.

[Big Joe]

Landowners need a "defensible system". Birmingham City Council Ash (1999), Poll vs Bartholomew (year?); some good stuff on AIE.org. Definitely scary territory! Poll v. Bartholomew judgement basically found that inspector was both underqualified and negiligent. Some definitions up on AIE website in joint statements from both prosecution and defence expert witnesses

[Bundle 2]

Mmm..re-reading my posts of old sometimes makes me wish the ground would open before me and swallow me up...!

 

Tony said " Basically you haven't recieved a clear answer because there isn't one. "

This made me crack a smile when I re-read it and I think it is as true as it ever was .

Anyone else here attend the AA conference on BS standards in Tree work?

It seems BS8516 is destined to resurface in revised format. NTSG are also licking their wounds after some unhelpful media coverage. To be honest, I was was bemused (and a little unconvinced) by a show of solidarity by the differing groups (bs8516 & NTSG ) but cannot say I know what went on behind the scenes...

I understood from the meeting that NTSG are hoping to produce more of a "strategic" guidance in relation to tree safety (than that which a new BS might prescribe.) This I tend to ( intuitively) welcome whilst I remain non-plussed by a new bs.....

All this talk about raising the bar for arboriculture. Great. But should BS lead arb or Arb lead bs? Seems a pointless distinction now that I put it on paper so to speak,however, If bs leads arb, it has to take arb with it....! Im not sure how concerned we should be that British Standards are hijacked to raise standards in industry practice ?

ftr The timetable at present for those interested in the work of NTSG looks like this:

Final draft..jan 2010

Consultation..spring 2010

Revision..summer2010

Guidance (proper)..summer/Autumn 2010

 

Anyone got any thoughts about the meeting or indeed the revised bs proffered a the meeting? I havent seen the revised paper from wednesday.

[jaime bray]

if you are conscientiously asking the question then use your instincts,ive just passed tech cert now doin pd,still wouldnt do 1,and it was discussed by 1 the lads when he was in court that his experience wasnt enough, basically if your going to put your name to it be prepared to go into court,and argue your point with the experts that used to climb but now write.its a mine field kid and you need to be like mustard. its a different game altogether