Andy Clark

Can you see it yet? Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Hello squire. Not toooooooo bad mate, cheers. Busy busy busy, which is always good good good. Yourself? I will do. I've never come across anyone else using them before, so thought I'd get one and have a bash. Got a few training courses coming up shortly, showing our some of our building surveyors the importance of considering the impacts on trees of the work they specify, so I'm hoping it'll be of use then if not out in the field as a survey tool. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Stoopid phone app didn't upload originally. Should be there now I've edited the post and tried again. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

New toy arrived today..... Just wondered if anyone else has had any previous experience with one? I'm hoping that it'll help with reinforcing decision making, and also as a guide to others as to why I say what I say when it comes to reasoning. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Granted, but we're not dealing with a different hypothetical notice whereby Person A has informed something different, we're dealing with this one, wherein he/she has clearly stated their intention to fell every tree over a ceratin dia. within the relevant area. On the basis that Person A has notified their intention to fell every tree, (which we are assuming for the purposes of this excersise includes trees on land that are not under person A's ownership), I would still argue that it would be reasonable to assume that they have the other tree owners permission to do so at the time of submitting the notice. Thus, an agent. As i said though, the alternative is to call their bluff, and still only cover his property with the order. Thus leaving them the leg work to then go round and get his neighbours on board. While the TO sits at his desk with Google Earth and the LA GIS system open, and makes individual TPO's to every tree with Person A's property - whilst drinking tea and eating biccys.

Ahh, it doesn't show up as bold from what I see. Must be the Tapatalk app that doesn't show the editing. Stoopid thing. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

What is? I don't understand the context of what you're saying is legal. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Not necessarily. For Person A to submit a blanket notification across an entire area, including trees that are outside of the remit of their own property boundary, I think it fair to assume that they had included neighboring properties with the neighboring landowners knowledge and consent..... Thus making Person A an agent. Remember, courts look for reasonableness, as benchmarked against the actions of a "reasonable person". Would it be reasonable, as a TO, to assume the above? I think so. Because it would be unreasonable, conversely, for Person A to submit notification to fell someone else's trees without the knowledge and consent of the tree owner. . In which case, I don't see that the DPA would come into effect, because you're not giving out "personal" info. You are responding, individually, to the respective property owners, regarding the actions of Person A, that you are reasonably assuming to be an agent acting on their behalf. Thus it's only Person A that could even claim under the DPA, and as it's not necessarily "personal info" I don't see they would have grounds for a claim. The flip side to that, if you're not going to assume he's acting as an agent, is to call their bluff, assume that it's vexatious, and only cover his property with the blanket order anyway. They would then have to go around and convince their neighbors to support their cause in order for any trees to be felled outside of the area order. I know what I'd say if my neighbour came banging on my door with words along the lines of "ere, do me a favour and let me fell the trees in your garden. I'm trying to get one over the Councils TO". Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Simples...... Bang out an area order, and then in the notification to the affected properties stick in a covering letter along the lines of - Dear Sir/Madam, Further to the S211 notice received from your agent, Person A, 123 Any Street, Any Town, anywhere, AB1 2CD, we hereby inform you that......... And then see how many of them take their wrath on Person A, for getting a TPO stuck on their property - leaving the TO all the time I'm the world to wander around the area in peace, identifying how many individual orders need to be made. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Bumpedy bump..... I think this is quite a salient point folks. We all moan and criticise the Arb Assoc for whatever our own reasons may be, and it's not often we get a proper chance to voice those directly. Take the opportunity. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Just wondered how many people took up Jaime's offer, and e-mailed directly with their comments? Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Well I need to read the thread more often. Was in enfield anyway, so have just got to high beech. Whooooppps. Lol. Shall we say saturday for defo? Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Might be 2 more joining in, if that's alright with everyone? Saw Tommy B today, and we're only an hour away. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

I just wish they'd make their mind up about how it's actually gonna happen. One minute it's a super volcano, one minute it's a flood, the next it's the shifting of the magnetic field........ I need to get dressed in the morning, but how the hell am I supposed to decide what to wear for THOSE extremely different scenarios? Hmmmmmmm., I wonder if type A c/saw trousers protect against volcano damage........ : Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Fantastic news Paul. With there currently being no realistic qualification that covers aerial inspection to any great extent, I've just been out and bought my own new climbing kit in order to undertake them myself, as I can't cover the liability by using our contractors. They will be accompanying me on the climbs in order to cover lone working and aerial rescue aspects of the climb etc, but the inspection/decision making/analysis etc will be carried out by me. Cracking vid Mr H! Picked up a flexible shaft drain camera earlier this year, for doing internal inspections of cavities. Great bit of kit that'll let me take photo and vids for inclusion into reports and/or survey records. I know that bit itself doesn't exactly relate to aerial inspections, but I did get it with a 10m extension - which I can send up to a clmber to poke into a hole, why I stand below directing and recording. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Don't worry, my younger wilder days of AA bashing have long gone. I'll be gentle Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Not at all Jaime, you're welcome. And thank YOU for your reply. If you could drop me a PM with your e-mail address, I'd be more than happy to strike up some dialog and let you have the rest of what lurks in where that came from. I look forward to hearing from you. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

No - like yourself Jaime, at the offset of my career in the early 90's, I agree that the AA, (with membership and/or accreditation thereof), were was seen as the pinnacle of the industry in the Uk, and aspired to "one day" join the rank and file within. But like it or not, towards the end of the 90's through the early 00's, the industry in this country changed. - We had the arrival on these shores of the NAA (as it was- now TCIA), and then the ISA., resulting in an influx of new methods, ideas, kit etc. - with the arrival of the PUWER, WAHR, LOLER etc, the practical (contracting) side of the industry had the increasing changes and implementation in H&S practices. - there was the rise of the golden "pound" within education, and more and more colleges jumping on the band wagon and offering (attempts) at arb quals (or rather "do a short course NPTC and you can become a "tree surgeon"), thus leading to an increase in the number of smaller companies as competency certs became the norm, and minimal requirement for lower level academic quals. - there was the demise of the "local authority approved" lists, and the introduction of schemes like CHAS, Construction Line, NHSS, etc - there was the increase in "a.n.other" magazines and publications that have continued to grow towards the Arb arm of the trees and timber industry, and create a clearer divide between Arb and Forestry. The list goes on, resulting in a LOT of very significant changes to an already still fairly juvenile industry. And for most, throughout that extremely formative period, the AA weren't visible. They weren't seen by the grass roots level, of being there, in the thick of it, "leading the industry". And in my humble opinion, I still think that the AA is stuck with the mindset under which it was created. For the academics. For the tree officers that were, back in the day, looking for a way of being able to employ contractors (including making money off them through membership/accreditation). The problem being, that the industry has moved on. The AAAC tag is not a prerequisite to work like it used to be. As an employer of contractors nowadays myself as an LA tree officer, I pay no attention (nor am I even allowed to) as to whether a contractor or consultant is accredited or even holds membership. It's simply irrelevant. And as the industry has progressed, so have the individuals. I've managed, like the rest, to grow. To progress. And I've managed that without those once magical little letters after my name. . Would take a lot to convince me these days that I now, or will ever need them. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Blah blah blah. Pesky kids! Lol. Yes mate, all good. You back over chrimbo at all? Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

You've hit the nail on the head there, with the other side of the coin - the need to be independent, and have a fair and unbiased view unclouded by "other factors". What is REALLY more important? Cost? Or making sure that you are less likely to have a fall? Yes, any and all climbers worth their salt will always check their kit as par for course before they even put the harness on...... But an extra set of independent eyes, just to double check, is surely more beneficial to your continued existence on this planet, than not? Especially if for the sake of the fact that you could've spent the money on something else? At the end of the day, no matter how hard we try, we, the user, will, on odd occasion, have those moments when we know something's not right - maybe that krab that you hardly use because it sticks a bit - and will justify it with "oh yes, must remember to pop to the suppliers for a new one". Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

I think the important point to remember folks, as has been touched on already, is that LOLER is generic across multiple industries - it is not Arb specific. Like most of these things, PUWER, DSEAR, WAHR, etc, they have all been written based on a quantified need for addressing a particular issue that arises across the wider aspects of industry as a whole.- Ie, if there are 1000 accidents with ladders in the uk, only one of them may be an Arb related accident, with the other 999 being across scaffolders, window cleaners, painters and decorators, roofers, etc - but we will end up with a generic "one size fits all" measure in place that will regulate the way that ANYONE and EVERYONE uses ladders. So over time, these regs filter down to the rank and file of the smaller industries - and those industries in turn create their own interpretations based on a view relative to their particular industry - this evolving to become "industry best practice". The general practices that are widely accepted by that industry. Yes, LOLER itself does not say that "thou shalt be qualified to inspect karabiners and lockjacks", but industry best practice says that you should be. And THAT is what you will be assessed on if it all goes pear shaped. Don't look at it as a bad thing. It's their for YOUR protection. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

I recon that'll end up being the way forward mate, with a bit of shortening too. It'll still give me some amount of movement if I want it, and will at least be easy to put on/take off mid climb. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Now THOSE were the days! Lol. Rockin' up at work to be given 50m of 3 strand - then cutting 2 x 1.5m lengths off each end, and splicing your own eyes and prussik loops . T22's may be old school, but they're like that knackered old pair of slippers that sits in the bottom of the cupboard. The ones you slip on to "just pop to the shed" and you just can't bear to part with. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

Yeah, I guess just adjusting the lower side D's and shortening the bridge would take out a lot of the movement. Good point there. Tom, you're biased! Lol. You just want the OV thimbled loop if I'm not gonna use it! Lol. ) Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

I'm in EXACTLY the same boat! 15 years in a T22, and after 5 years off the tools and wanting to get back into it, the TreeMotion seemed like a good idea! Lol. I did think of an alpine butterfly, but I don't fancy having the krab attached directly to the bridge at the same constant point. Ok, it'll probably take a while, but I can see it becoming a wear point - hence the thimbled strop, so the thimble then takes the movement of the krab and doesn't risk eating through the bridge. Or at least that's what seems a good idea in my head. Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk