Amelanchier

I'd quite forgotton about this. Perhaps it might help if you set out a scene?

Cheers Dave. I'll keep that in mind when an elusive ciatation rears it head. I was just after expanding my collection and know (used to know?) people who would simply bin them.

**Vic & Bob tumbleweed moment**

I appreciate your pain - bad tree work is bad enough, but bad tree work on your doorstep really stings. However, we're trying to move the site away from this kind of posting, so whilst I don't want to bin your thread directly, I will close it.

Definately poison the stump. Even the lateral roots left from grinding will regen, probably right through the path... If it is protected, give this as the reason for your application to fell/poison/grind/replant replacement in better location. Causing damage to third party property is a fairly good reason to consent to felling.

AA registered contractors?

Hi gang. I'm after AA journals before Vol 28 No 3 Apr 2005 and ISA Journals after Vol 34 No. 6 Nov 2008. Obviously I'll pay a reasonable price. I realise back copies can be bought from both organisations but I thought I'd see if anyone wanted to declutter their life first! PM me with details - cheers .

If I Remember Correctly. A handy way of stating something whilst reserving the right to be completely wrong - I use it a lot.

I guess thats because somewhere along the line, you have to trust that an awarding body has assessed someone appropriately. Is the apocryphal decline in education the fault of the AA? This doesn't really follow - the problems are twofold. I highly doubt the AA considers you to be unprofessional because you aren't a member, you've inferred this by inverting their aims. If I like beer, it doesn't mean that you don't. Secondly, do you expect the AA to promote your obvious professionalism for free? On the contrary, a qualification is the same as any achievement. It has the value that others give it, just like a service or product. You might not personally ascribe value to qualifications but they are indeed valued by a large proportion of others - particularly outside our little arb bubble. There is a reason why graduates statistically earn more than non graduates. I would suggest education is the key, whether you achieve that through qualification or experience matters less. On balance I would say a 30:70 mix is probably ideal. IIRC the AA offers an equivalent route into membership by interview to evaluate experience (I know, I know you shouldn't have to prove yourself to a bunch of pencil pushers... )

Classic.

I think fundamentally Andy, people who aspire for change in any system /organistaion fall into two camps; reformers and revolutionaries. I (try to) think of myself as a reformer, you've got to be in it to change it. You seem to me to be a revoultionary - tear it down and start again. Unless they have guns or fill the streets with rioters - revolutionaries never win. They are sidelined, marginalised and ignored by the mainstream. Its a shame because the reformers and the revolutionaries want the same thing but will never agree. When I was an angry teenage knowitall [insert joke here] I remember a great teacher once asked me during an arguement, "Is there anything I can say that will make you change you mind?" I stubbornly said "No, because you're wrong." "Well then this conversation was over before it begun."

I dunno - sounds slanderous to me...

As I've said on another thread - there are some false dichotomies here. What, in your opinion, is a non amenity tree? A TO's remit is wider than you think but varies post to post. My given duty for the LPA I worked for was to "Protect and enhance the natural environment and green infrastructure of the district". So there is a considerable difference between the job role and the statutory duties of the TCPA 1990. Trying to raise the standard of work is part of that duty regardless of who is undertaking it AAAC / Non-AAAC / Cowboy / Landscaper / Homeowner / Bored window fitters. Most of it is education, but occaisionally it is enforcement. Now whether you think it works or not, the AA has a complaints procedure, which provides an additional enforcement option. Would you prefer that TO's were prevented from using this option? Given that TO's strive to raise standards (or should do at least), why do you want them to exempt AAACs?

Sure. I just wonder why you think that TOs shouldn't enforce the standards of one particular group of contractors. The fact that most TOs haven't got the time or powers to do so isn't relevant. Well I guess they're damned if they do and damned if the don't . IMO interesting parallels can be drawn with the ISA. They're representing tree workers internationally without talking to non members like me (how very dare they!) and they have a certification scheme that could be accused of your inverse slander (You're an Arborist, does than mean I'm not?). Yet curiously they attract very little vitriol.

And here in this thread.

Yep fair enough. I forgot the smiley

Your question makes assumptions that are not supported. You infer that the AAAC scheme contributes to 'unregulation' and 'unstandardisation'. You also infer that the scheme could do more to prevent these things. Therefore it begs the question, does the AAAC sheme actually do these things? I'd suggest, anecdotes excepted, we don't know if they do.

What's the relevance of the business model to point 3? If you are a professional, does that mean I'm not? Are the LA slandering me as a car seller if they do endorse autotrader?

McCarthyism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Andy, 1) Your question begs another - you have assumed that AAACs divide the industry. You do not have any proof of this. 2) TOs 'police' standards anyway. They have always been able to contact the AA - would you like them to stop? Presumably you would have a problem with a TO contacting the ISA if a problem were to arise with an ISA cert Arb, or BALI should a landscaper undertake poor work? My publically paid remit as a TO was to preserve and enhance the green infrastruce of the district - 'policing' standards of work is a perfectly reasonable part of that. 3) Assertion of a fact does not neccesarily imply the inverse. I have a car. This does not mean that you dont have a car. You are a Professional, does that mean I'm not? If I log onto autotrader to look for a car for sale, does that unfairly prejudice people selling cars who haven't paid for an advert. This is all getting a bit daft.

Sorry but I don't have a clue what your point is either. And as if it needed saying, the forum rules apply to this thread as much as any other - whilst this is a valid oppourtunity to discuss/criticise the document, confrontational language is unnecessary.

Good to have an AA presence on the 'talk Paul! Should be beneficial for everyone involved.

Nice. Poor old tree was getting a bit of a kicking though huh?

I is wel fik and that.