educated arborist

the msc in urban forestry has been strugaling to run the last i heard, numbers have been too low for them to run it last i heard, anyone know any different?

some do quite alot of takedowns, but most are plant & replace. Iv'e managed to plant many, many more than ive cut down, Planting 20 various extra heavy standard conifers next week as well as 20 4m tall beech. Plant and replace can often be a better option than big reductions IMO but it typically is a larger initial outlay for the client.

Mark Johnston once said to me that 'arborists are the interface between trees & people' its all about comprimise. A coprimise that far too often results in a tree being un-nesiserrily reduced. I don't think that any1 has implied that the trees are begging for it mark, quite the opposite in fact. Many tree surgeons in the UK are too quick to reduce a tree IMO.

oooh how'd u get them CE'd then bob??????? ha ha only teasing:001_tongue:

:scared1:NOT a gri gri, an ID! it looks the same but is not the same.

why get a lambo if you win the lottery, the good old fiesta starts & runs...................... A rope guide is not only very, very shiny but it makes climbing easyer for you & your body. An investment well worth making IMO

that wasn't what i was sayin at all, sorry u took it that way, so long as clients understand & are willing to continue to manage the tree thats great :thumbup1:as you said cyclical maintainance. i'm not even averse to pollarding or bolling in the right senario.

seen way 2 much of that

it wasn't your fixe i was refering to. Many >22kn micro pulleys are plenty strong enough but the bearings/ bushes are not designed for prolonged use and wear v.quickley The cocoon on the other hand is designed as a main anchor.

good points. All of my clients tend not to opt for a reduction after ive explained the options only once in three years have i had a client say nope i just want it in half no questions asked. I have not reduced 1 mature tree in those three years with the exeption of some staged take downs with their replacements growing up next to them allowing the loss of tree cover to be staggered. Then there are some of my signiture giants topiary which have an anual trim (so far) without fail. When you word it positivly & honestly most people are quite apriciative. My quote boog is FULL of dendrological diagrams/ doodles i draw to illistrate what i mean to clients. But prehaps the people who seek me out are typically wanting me to suggest how best to maintain their tree/ tree stock as apposed to all-ready having decided what prune to have on which trees.

its quite a maintaince intensive way of managing a tree IMO which is great because it makes us work but is not usually best for the client IMO. I feel that its important that a client understands that once it's been reduced it will continue to need re-reducing & that any increased light may well be short lived as is any lower hazard rating. A good thin is usually better implimented in my experiance, less chance of epicormic growth, less stress for the tree, reduced sail effect & often more light for longer than a reduction. A big tree is not unsafe because it is big & reducing it will not nesiserily make it any safer & if it is not re-reduced then it will be less safe than it was in the begining. Taking back senecent trees is fine but i'd prefer to brand it a staged take down and this is how many reductions end up, each reduction has to go back that little bit further to find sound wood/unions until the prune is a boll. I'm not saying that any of the pictured reductions were poorly implimanted just that many ( more often that not) are poorly implimented even if well executed.

yeah i believe they are bushed as apposed to bearings but either way any bushes/ bearings in a pulley to be used for this purpose must be designed to last, most micro pulleys were designed for ocasional hauling/ rescue aplications not every day anchor points, the bearings or bushes just wear strait down if u hang on they day in day out

no answers there, are you trying to acheive more light? a lesser hazard? create a sculpture/ certian shape? or do the clients just insist on maintaining it at a certain size for no particular reason?

great thread but what is the purpose of these well executed reductions?

allot of the pulleys pictured in these home made savers are not designed for be used like this. They are plenty strong but the bearings are not designed to be loaded like this for any period of time. Jamie has the right idea using the ART pulley (the cocoon would prob have been eeeeeeven better) Im not knocking makin your own saver, i just see loads of these pulleys with knackered bearings when they've been used like this.

Dito:thumbup1: more so the 41 IMO the underlying physics are v important & i'd argue that even more detail should be added testing knowlege on the weakest link in the system PL & CTF diferences in hardware & software etc. The number of inspections i do where a rope too strang to be used with a capstan is being & dont froget its not the SWL we're talking about its maintaining the rope as the weakest link in the system. I'm not having a dig at any1 part of me feels that supliers should be better educated & more pro-active as well as loler inspectors, NPTC assesors, employers & employees alike.

ha ha yea it does take a while very good though

thats for ropes. Try Reading the latest tree rigging research commisioned by the HSE & completed by liam of treevolution & others. hardware: 5:1 Slings: 7:1 Rope: 10:1 Its all to do with CTF & PL's but you don't have to take my word for it, but i'd hope that i know what i'm talkin about lol.

OK firstly the SF (safety factor) arborists apply to hadware in rigigng operations is 5:1 not 10:1 so the SWL of your pulley is 900kg. It is not designed for snatching & must hand freely when in use not leaning or bending against any branches. The SF takes account for allot but it is worth bearing in mind that a main rigging pulley will be loaded with a 200kg log & have a 200kg aposing force at the capstan end meaning that a 200kg log loads the pulley with 400kg when being lowered. When setting up re-direct pulleys it should be beared in mind that a shallow re-direct angle will exert lateral forces on the tree against which it is far weaker. These pulleys can be linked in a train of two when speedlining but its best to buy a purpose built tandem pulley IMO, ISC make a real nice stainless steel one which is stronger that the petzl tandem and accepts 16mm rope if required. secondly yes, for arguments sake 45kn is 4500kg, depending on your altitude on earth etc etc etc put lets not get anal

who has these 100 c/m artics? all i've come accross are a tad smaller.

The problem with the AAACS is that it is not economically viable at the moment. I have spent hours & hours & hours listening to AC's gripes with the system. It is not well enough polieced is the main concern, but this is indeed a chicken an egg situation: the AA need more money AAAC fees to poliece the scheme & the contractors need them to poliece it to convince them to get on board. There are also some major holes in the scheme IMO but i wont get it to that on here.

an ODT of 10mm> chip is 2m3 in volume so 0.5t/m3 but larger chip could be as low as 0.25t/m3 if oven dry but is more likely to be 0.5t due to MC.

it is neither a knaunt (of which their are 2-3 variations) or a distel, is closest to a distel but is not one.

if its too hard to undo with a fid/ screwdriver & vice then its probably overloaded anyway so just buy a new 1?

I have met many AC's who are less then happy with the scheme, i have also met those who rate it. It does have its problems & i hope that they can find the funding to rectify them, but that is the chicken & egg.