Amelanchier

I like that - a single A4 sheet with a consistent brand image and layout. Swish.

Ha ha. Did you dress up? They've got some good singles though (keep telling yourself...)

Perhaps there are some closet mycophiles hiding who just like watching!

Getting injured up a stick was one of my worst fears - its a seriously technical and physically difficult rescue and I know i'd struggle. Just thinking about it worries me. As you say, definately needs its profile raising and perhaps a compulsory pole rescue would focus the mind!

A statutory right. Don't forget that the council is also insured!!!

Tree warden or tree officer?

Diagnosis of Ill Health in Trees by Strouts & Winter has the control measures for all of those.

Ha ha I aim to please!

"These images are for information purposes only. The views presented that relate to these images are similarly for information purposes only. Arbtalk.co.uk and its contributors cannot be held responsible for any damage to persons or property that occurs as a result of the use of these knots or hitches. They should be used by competent, qualified climbers - and as such, the climber is responsible for his or her equipment and setup. As with all new climbing equipment and techniques they should be tried or practiced 'low and slow' in a safe environment." Should be fine - it's no different than a knot book...

A big disclaimer? Something like this... LOW & SLOW

The tree should be planted the right way up, as the roots are fussy, with a preference for soil. Honestly what a lame question.

I don't think this is something to get hung up on guys. I doubt very much that is the intention of the revision. Also note that this is the consultation phase which ends on 16 March 2009 - nothing is set in stone so let's not light the torches and break out the pitchforks just yet. I quote the executive summary [my emphasis in bold]:- "These changes are only a proposal and please send your comments on the proposed structure and units to [email protected]..." Did anyone actually read the document??

Hmmm what's regular? If you ony read one bit - read this bit (the summary!) I've only given it a quick scan; the ID test for CS38 caught my eye!!! ha ha chainsaw_consultation_summary_feb09[1].pdf

Bump again!

Proposed changes to the CS system... http://www.nptc.org.uk/latest-news/detail.asp?dsid=347 Thoughts?

Care to share with the class???

I think this is a seperate issue from defining competence to splice. I'd suggest that you don't need be a LOLER inspector to be competent at splicing and therefore we can define the latter without the former. (Thankfully) I think the issue can be broken down into two main directions:- What is competence? How do we assess it?

Ah but you need to be able to prove that they are your splices...

Just for info - I've copied the splicing based comments into its own thread.

I assume competance would be have to be assessed? So presumably by someone already competant (there's a chicken and egg issue there!) watching you splice and then taking your splice/s away from you and testing it. Then a periodic re-assessment to keep pencil-pushers like me who play at tree climbing sharp and up to date!

I assume competance would be have to be assessed? So presumably by someone already competant (there's a chicken and egg issue there!) watching you splice and then taking your splice/s away from you and testing it. Then a periodic re-assessment to keep pencil-pushers like me who play at tree climbing sharp and up to date!

Cheers Kev. I noticed the following sections [my emphasis in bold]: 14 Climbers must be aware of the different characteristics of tree species and how these affect the work to be carried out. They must also be able to assess the structure and condition of the tree to be climbed and any potential weakness caused by decay and damage. Sounds good but the implications are wide IMO. 42 Splices should be made by someone competent to splice, eg the manufacturer. Competence should be demonstrable for each rope type. Hmmmm I can splice but am I competent???

Thought the splicing discussion would be best held in its own thread! So, where were we? This has now been included within the new AFAG 401 Best practice leaflet. 42 Splices should be made by someone competent to splice, eg the manufacturer. Competence should be demonstrable for each rope type. Hmmmm I can splice but am I competent???

Bump! C'mon I need at least 50 voters!

Ah but Nick, I'm not really interested in the tree - it was an illustration. I'm interested in individual perceptions of likelihood of failure. What I was hoping to find (and the second experiment did kind of get there) was a normal distibution of answers. And if you plot normal distributions you get a phenomena known as the bell curve which I was hoping to see in the poll graph. Now it didn't happen in this poll graph because I failed to break down the lower end of the scale but the second attempt was more successful. Relevance? Well knowing the mid range (i.e., the centre 50%) of the data gives an statistical indication of a baseline for the perception of likelihood of failure. A baseline which might be used to level the arguement playing fields. Another thing which would be nice to look at was if arboricultural knowledge affected the placement of this baseline and if so, to what degree... So anyway - that was the reason behind the experiment not an actual assessment of the tree which is understandably what everyone went with.