Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Amelanchier

Veteran Member
  • Posts

    3,810
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Amelanchier

  1. Er, how about the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and the Risk Assessment (Management of Health and Safety at Work) Regulations 1999? Your boss MUST undertake a written risk assessment of tree climbing activities which should base its recommendations and control measures on industry guidelines (such as the AFAG). Ask to see it. When he tells you that he doesn't need one or hasn't got one - tell him he's an idiot.
  2. Very imminent as I understand - weeks if not days... Finally! Lots of reading for some people!
  3. Thats the draft for the new version - which might be issued sooner than you think...
  4. Guys, you'll understand that we can't be seen to condone breach of copyright so I'll be closing your thread and deleting it in the next couple of days...
  5. Neat label. Ironically presented in a self-referential sentence. Oops You've turned over two pages at once there Tony. Flick back and let me know how you got to here from where we were!
  6. Ah now there's a proper point to argue - but perhaps in a seperate thread.
  7. Yes but its more complicated than that, there's an oppourtunity to object and the whole game can be kicked back and forth to PINS/DCLG (I've no idea who decides it) - see section 8.4 of the Blue Book. Messy messy buisiness IMO. Whats the case?
  8. Yep, but only on Orders served before 2 August 1999. This is because consents tended not to include time limits although whether its fair or reasonable to do so "soon" after granting consent is debatable. The proposed revisions to the legislation plan to remove this facility.
  9. Tony - either you fundamentally misunderstand science and its associated academia or you deliberatley misrepresent it to lower your cognitive dissonance. In any case, its extremely frustrating! David - apologies for the over-colloquialisation of your name. FTR airspading is probably a good idea but I don't know of anyone commercially using it for this purpose. I think its probably prohibitively expensive to implement.
  10. If its of any help/interest to anyone, Paul and I have cobbled a flowchart together with regard to Waste Transfer Notes (see attached). If I get a chance (perhaps if I stop faffing about on here!) I'll get one together for an overview of the whole WCL/WTN issue. Arb Arisings and EA Requirements Flowchart v2.pdf
  11. Problem is it then goes on to say; "... if virgin timber is mixed with waste timber or any other waste, the mixed load is classed as waste." So your load might contain chip/timber that does qualify as the elusive virgin timber but if there is any non virgin timber materal in the load (i.e., a leaf), the whole lot is waste. Which is clearly mental, but hey.
  12. Who is "they" and "them"? You know you should really wear two layers of foil to stop the CIA using their satellite to read your mind... You're right of course - you can plant a tree in the wrong place without an airspade. However, you might not be so inclined to delude yourself into thinking that its a good idea just because you used one.
  13. You'd get circling roots in square/triangular/concave decagon pots if you left them long enough - its not the shape, its the time the tree spends in it... Nice project though David. Just to play devils advocate (which is obviously my natural state), I wonder if use of the airspade to dig pits might encourage the planting of trees in soil environments that offer poorer long term viability?
  14. I think you've done it yourself already Paul. Maybe a pretty flowchart would be handy? If I get a chance (ha ha) I'll see if I can put something together. I think the key (as has been said before) is not to get too hung up on the words used - "waste", "exempt". They're used in a legislative sense and mean specific things beyond their normal day to day use. Bit like the word "nuisance" in relation to protected trees.
  15. If you want to get involved, have a play and be able to say "I cut that beam myself" then go with what you'd planned (with Josh's choice of saw). Nothing wrong with that at all - I'd probably want to do the same. However, a pro will maximise the product, cut the right bits more often and create far less waste. He'll also show you how to stack/store it and you'll gain much more from the experience - information that you can use in the future. At the very least I'd suggest costing that option as well to compare if its pure sustainability your after. Sounds like you have a good setup (I'm jealous). I doubt I have earned much authority on sustainable living sitting here in my beaten up Victorian terrace, typing in between hurling entire plantations into my woodburner so that I can heat the rest of the town through my duff windows...
  16. Hi Minas, welcome to the forum. What's the problem with the soil? I only ask because unless I'm mistaken, there is no existing research indicating the value/efficacy of aeration systems. Might there be other alternatives to your problem?
  17. Dean - I'd imagine that a truly dedicated anti-authoritarian might consider telling the EA in advance where and when he was going to breach their regulations... As for using the power of the 'talk to fund your legal fees - take a look at the money raised in the Xmas raffle. Then half it to reflect the number of members who actually care about the issue, then half it again to account for the inevitable inconsistency of human nature... so under £1000. Hmmmm.
  18. Further to what Scott has said above, I suspect its more sustainable to source the conversion work from local trade/crafts persons - definatley more efficient financially. I realise the purpose of the exercise is to be self sustaining and not buy more timber in but its a mistake to forget the sustainable use of capital/finance in the equation. With the cash saved by outsourcing the conversion work or (perhaps even buying in the more critical bits of timber) you can invest back into the woodland. A proactive management plan will yield greater returns over a longer period than reactive use of occaisional products. You might even get to the point where it pays for itself... If you're already doing that then I'll shut up!
  19. I'm sure that when we have our head around the QCF it will duly be changed again!
  20. Well whilst the two qualification share a framework level, they're not exactly equal - specifically the ISA cert arb has the advantage of a Continuing Professional Development (CPD) requirement which allows you to show a commitment for ongoing progression to any future employers. If you've passed the RFS course - its an easy step onward which bags you the CPD and a wider recognition throughout the wider international industry should you wish to travel and work.
  21. Sounds promising Paul! Bet you've logged some hours on hold with the EA to get this far! IIRC the form you mention can be completed online via the EA website - its been catchily titled; "T6 - Treatment of waste wood and waste plant matter by chipping, shredding, cutting or pulverising" Environment Agency - T6 - Treatment of waste wood and waste plant matter by chipping, shredding, cutting or pulverising

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.