Joe Public - how do you think they see the Arb world?

[Taupotreeman]

Agree largely with this. People will notice bad tree work far easier than good tree work, and unfortunately bad tree work sticks out like a sore thumb pretty much anywhere you look. Personally i'm not really concerned with what the public think. If they have the need for a tree surgeon they will use one, and assuming that tree surgeon is me then they can decide at that point how they wish to categorize my skills. It won't affect the rate I charge them regardless

 

Unfortunately, in my neck of the woods, good tree work to most clients IS boshing the top out of a tree so the view is returned. Seen some absolute crackers recently done by fellow arborists around town. But I don't want to spark the topping of trees argument as we all know where that'll end up

 

We cant seem to win with the public here. Take a tree out because it's dangerous and we get people writing in to the paper complaining that chainsaw Charlie is on the rampage again. Leave a tree alone and we get people complaining about lost views, too many leaves, root issues, shading issues. The Council (and my employers) can be the worst. They now have a tree committee made up of three people who have no idea about trees. Most removals have to go to them for approval. We recently had a stand of beautiful native Beech approved to be removed because they block a view but a street full of ugly, topped and hacked Oaks get to stay.

[Andy Clark]

I'm sure that 99% of the tree surgeons/arborists/climbers/arboriculturists on here use the phrase "works completed to BS3998:2010 Tree Work- Recommendations on their advertising, quotes or specifications. Can anyone tell me which paragraph includes boshing the top off because that's what the client wants

 

 

Ahh, but the thread is not about "us", it's about Joe Public, and their perception/ignorance/understanding of "us", of what "we" do and of why "we" do it.

 

"We" all know that 99.9% of "us" work to 3998. No one's saying otherwise. The same could equally be said that "we" all know that when faced with requests to bosh the top off, 99.9% of "us" would then happily stand there for 10 minutes trying to explain to the client that "Well madam, reduction doesn't really work in allowing more light into your garden - primarily because light travels in straight lines, but also because crown reduction in most cases only goes to promote the tree to form a lower, denser crown in the longer term, which then just goes to block more light. Sooooooo, if you want more light into your garden, I would actually suggest a crown thinning exercise, combined with a subtle crown lift, achieved by removing some of the lower sub laterals, which will then let more light flow THROUGH the crown". and so on and so on........

 

So the point, is why, when "we" stand there, prattling on and giving "our" advice/recommendation/opinion/specifcation/quotation/approval/refusal for works, relative to whatever our individual job role may be in the industry, in accordance with 3998 or any other best practice/guidance, does Joe Public gaze back at "us" like we're talking gobbledegook?

 

Why has Joe Public asked us to Bosh it in the first place, and made us stand there for 10 mins and explain that boshing is not the right thing to do? Why does the water/gas/electric/cable tv engineer look at the TO like he's grown a second head, when the TO turns up and tries to explain that trenching through the rootplate of a mature specimen Oak is likely to 1) kill the tree, and 2) leave it at risk of falling over cos you'll have just cut through the things that hold it in the ground?

 

Why, and I'm referring to Joe Public as a whole, not just homeowners in domestic dwellings, as the same could very easily be said for businesses/business premises etc, do we generally as a nation not have a better understanding of trees and/or arb?

 

Less confusing?

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[Gary Prentice]

Andy, I'm probably not getting my point across properly. Shigo discussed this issue years back and if I get time I'll try to find the link. His opinion was that everyone involved in the profession or trade or industry or whatever he termed it was a professional. He admitted, as I would, that because of the nature of the work ie physical, it attracted a lot of people not of a great academic nature. There would be many who never wished to go further, who didn't want or need to know the reason for target pruning. Just cut where they were told.

 

So that encompasses part of the industry, those who want to know more study academically, to learn more and be in a better position to do the job. But the job has now changed, it becomes more hands off and more as a advisory position. Some of the lads on here, who I've met, have studied for years and are professional people in every sense.

 

I've no doubt that most of the practicing arbs on here 'advise' some clients with regard to their trees. Once you do that surely you begin to stop being a tree cutter /lumberjack/ faller and start becoming a professional person. The job has now changed, whether you like it or not, you're becoming and advisor/consultant. You may not be qualified with years at uni, but you're doing that job.

 

I can think of a dozen arb-talkers, who are still hands on tree cutters whose depth of knowledge of the law, pertaining to trees, mycology, ecology and other subjects would put many an undergraduate to shame.

 

But to go back to the original question. If we don't class arboriculture as a profession or a 'professional occupation' ourselves, how do we portray the industry to others, to the public and to other professional types. If I speak to a QS, a landscape architect, an architect I know I my knowledge, in my subject, is far superior to theirs. I may cut trees still but I, personally, have no issue about being on different levels of knowledge or academic achievement.

 

I'm probably still not getting my point across succinctly, but I've got to go and eat.

[Ms2004life]

Taupo tree man thats a new zealand wide mentality, its all very knee jerk arboriculture here, sh&t we have people advertising for tree topping here. Where in europe your asked to consult here people tell you what you should be doing? Tree care as a whole is. Ommonly thrown into the same bucket as loggers or the fricken axmen, the thought of someone being skilled and caring about an inanimate object is foreign to most. A long bumpy road till joe public realise the benefits of arboriculture.

[Taupotreeman]

Taupo tree man thats a new zealand wide mentality, its all very knee jerk arboriculture here, sh&t we have people advertising for tree topping here. Where in europe your asked to consult here people tell you what you should be doing? Tree care as a whole is. Ommonly thrown into the same bucket as loggers or the fricken axmen, the thought of someone being skilled and caring about an inanimate object is foreign to most. A long bumpy road till joe public realise the benefits of arboriculture.

 

I'd probably have to agree with you. I think it's changing in some places but judging by some of my friend's recent Facebook posts, it's still a problem that exists in the bigger cities even.

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App