AA Teccie (Paul)

For information: Breaking News for December 2011 The NTSG Management Committee is about to publish the long awaited guidance it has been preparing. The release date for the three guidance documents is Monday 5th December 2011. These are: 1. Common sense risk management of trees (The main guidance document priced at £19.99 plus P&P) 2. A Landowner Summary (for estates and smallholdings available free) 3. Managing Trees for Safety (For the domestic tree owner available free) The NTSG Management Committee would like to thank all for their forbearance in waiting for this guidance and apologises for the unexpected but unavoidable delay in bringing it to publication. see Forestry Commission - National Tree Safety Group (NTSG)

Hi James, In general, it's better to avoid pruning, certainly heavily, during periods of leaf-fall, i.e. around now, and leaf formation, i.e. early Spring. Therefore when dormant, avoiding prolonged frost periods, or when actively growing, avoiding prolonged drought periods. And rememeber, ideally, if you do want to 'heavly prune' a phased approach, a little but often, is better for the tree. Regards.. Paul PS As a point of refernce the industry standard for tree works is BS3998 (2010) 'Recommendations for Tree Work'

TRAINING inc. knowledge commencement + ASSESSMENT (ideally after a period of skills consolidation, i.e. 3-6 months...but seldom happens) + EXPERIENCE with mentoring and knowledge enhancement (for a minimum period of 18-24 months) = COMPETENCE (hopefully) + further EXPERIENCE (another 24-36 months) = PROFICIENCY with increased competence and knowledge. Just trying to emphasise Steve's point really that the ticket, in reality, is evidence of a basic standard of skill. Enjoy.. Paul

"When you can't hide behind your friends anymore?"...good effort?

Hi all, I've adopted a 'watching brief' on this post....needless to say I didn't have to watch for long, ha! Why is that?...dis-illusionment?....complacency?....a combination?, or summat else? Perhaps, to some extent, and just 'thinking out loud' here so don't shoot me down too hard, but is the organisational fragmentation, to some extent, a reflection of an insular industry where there's a perception we don't need a voice? The Association, whilst not everybody's "cup-of-tea", but then with many, no cups of tea (nor cake!) would appeal, does TRY to accomodate and assist all working within the industry, wherever that may be...in the tree, on the ground, in the office or committee room. I know we don't always get it right and I wonder if sometimes we spread our efforts too thinly and hence perhaps appear ineffective? Dunno, just some thoughts out loud as I said but we really do want to help make your day-to-day job easier / more effective / not so isolated...so wheer do I roll up mi sleeves first? Cheers all n any feedback much appreciated. Take care out there..! Paul..

Hi there, Likewise, we have previously taken legal action succesfully against a contractor for persistently 'mis-using' the ARB Approved logo when he was not...it cost him dearly approx £30k (mainly legal fees as it dragged on for months.) Over here Trading Standards are alos intersted to hear about persistent offenders and, often in conjucntion with otehr issues, take action for 'mis-representation.' Cheers.. Paul

Hi-de-hi, I believe we did used to sell vehicle stickers, the generic 'Cares for Trees', some time ago but we don't now. In terms displaying the logo, the only people allowed to do so are the 'ARB Approved Contractors' and 'Registered Consultants', no level of membership, not even 'Fellows' are permitted to do so but they can make written reference to such and use the associated post-nominals, i.e Fred Blogs is a Fellow of the Arb Association with F.Arbor.A This situation regarding members using the logo and probably highlighting such, i.e. 'Arb Assoc MEMBER', has been previously discussed and members views canvassed but currently it is 'status quo'. Cheers all.. Paul PS Excuse me if I don't post back now til Friday as I'm on the road this evening and delievring a course all day tomorrow...thanks!

Great review for a great job = SIMPLES! The 'AA thing' means different things to different people and thereby brings differnet benefits. MY 'Utopia' would be that all reputable and competent arb contractors would become 'ARB Approved' so we would then have a tree care industry equivalent to 'CORGI/Gas Safe' that all tree owners would be aware of and recognise...still! Some achieve 'ArbAC' primarily for the 'badge', i.e. stamp of recognition, some to confirm compliance and employers 'peace of mind', and some to access specifc contracts and/or place themselves better in the market place so to do. Whatever your motivation the process of becoming 'ArbAC' undoubtedly improves the business of arb contracting often associated with H&S compliance and good business practice rather than the actual 'doing' side of things. Gis a shout if you wanna know more. Cheers.. Paul

Excellent job, thanks for posting (always think it's very brave of people to do so BUT always impressed by the feedback, be it positive or (constructively) negative.) Where should I post the 'ArbAC' application pack to?, ha! Cheers.. Paul

Hi 'Treequip', Thanks for the previous, very succinct and accurate, picture of insurance requirements, very useful! Just on your last point above, the 'AA' were very active at that time speaking with insurance provider(s?) to miantain cover for the industry during those difficult times. Thankfully these days there are plenty to choose from. I only mention this as often, quitely rightly so, many ask 'what?' the AA does for the industry and this is something we were very active with. Remember the 'bigger' the membership (starting at just above 50-quid) the 'BIGGER' the voice. Cheers fer the post. Paul

Hi there, apologies (again) for my lateness in posting here. The 'new' BS3998 does cover stump grinding in Chapter 12. Although it doesn't state a depth for grinding it does highlight the importnace of specifying such. In general, I would suggest, a minimum depth of 150mm, i.e. 6 inches, is 'the norm'. Cheers.. Paul

Hmmm, all looks a little concerning to me. Not just in relation to the 'one-handed' chainsaw use (here) but the whole work positioning issue, i.e. out stretching, and the strength (or not as the case maybe) of the branches supporting you. A hand-saw would have made things more acceptable, a polesaw even more so and a MEWP even, even more so...all in support shout 'Yeah' (tee hee!) IMHO what we have here is an unecessary risk taking action, one which I acknolwedge prevails and often without meaning too / inadvertently, i.e. "just getting the job done", but perhaps the fact you've asked the question indicates a concern. See attached from the 'Guide to Good Climbing Practice' whihc may help inform the process of using tools in the tree. Hope this is useful. Cheers.. Paul Use of Tools in the Tree.doc

Hi all, I'm pleased to say the weather 'up north' served us well and the three contractors even better. Well done and congrats to: 1. Denis Rowlandson of D R Tree Surgeons (Preston) 2. Richard Allinson of Edenarb (Penrith) 3. Kevin Patton of Kevin Patton Tree Surgeons ltd (Guisborough) on achieving 'ARB Approved Contractor' status. These are all good, solid, small businesses doing excellent stuff for the industry..."keep up the good work guys and thanks for the opportunity!" Cheers.. Paul

Richard "gud'onya', well done with a very good assessment and a great outcome. Hope you're feeling better rested and managed to switch off the 'midnight oil'..! Cheers. Paul

Hi all, just a quick 'heads up' to mention I'm venturing up north again tonight for 3 days with the 2nd batch of LA nominated contractors: 1. DR Tree Surgeons of PRESTON 2. Eden Arb of PENRITH 3. Kevin Patton of GUISBOROUGH Good luck to them all for positive assessment outcomes (follow the lead of the previous three which were very succesful.) Cheers.. Paul PS How's the forecast looking....YUK?!

Hi Timmy, Much of this will be covered by the site risk assessment process. See Help becoming an ARB Approved Contractor for some examples and perhaps follow the Module 1 - Site Inspection of the 'ARB Approved Contractor' standard (see Become an ARB Approved Contractor scrolling down to find the 2x word docs.) Good luck.. Paul PS Don't forget too that the AFAG guides, as well as giving guidance to establish a 'safe system of work', can be used for site safety audits (hence the tick boxes in the l/hand margins.)

Thanks for your post in reply here (and to see it's longer than mine, ha!) To be honest I think we are talking the same language here, i.e. a balanced and sensible approach to risk management. However in order to do so we need a start point, and hence that's the accident book, use of which I would promote to businesses of all sizes as we quickly forget how many significant cuts we get. I wholly acknolwdge it is very physical and demanding job, and that's a large part of the attraction, but belive me when yer knowcking on a bit and yer hands, fingers n grip don't work like they should then there might be regret at such a broad acceptance. A tip, if I'm still qualified to give such being nothing more than a 'pen pusher' these days, try to get 'ambidextrous' in using the hand-saw, at least then you'll share the cuts n nicks and hopefuly avoid a few as positioning is easier. Cheers.. Paul

Hi there, I sincerely hope my presence doesn't stifle healthy debate here regarding the "pro's n con's" of 'ARB Approved Contractor' status but, if I may, I'd like to offer a couple of comments. Firstly, whilst 99% of businesses go through the assessment in order to gain the acreditation, i.e. the outcome, the greatest value to your business is the process and having that industry 3rd party stamp as being a compliant contractor. This should give you peace of mind and reassure your employees you are a good, and compliant, contractor. Secondly, whilst 'ArbAC' status may not directly secure more work it may 'open doors', particularly it is now combined with CHAS and soon to be SAFEcontractor as well, i.e. 2 for 1 now and 3 for 1 soon to be (this relates to the audit process. What the Association is seeking to achieve through the accreditation scheme is a recognised standard across the industry for the benefit of all, i.e. whilst not mandatory that 'CORGI' equivalent so mnay yearn for. More than happy to answer any questions, otherwise I'll sit and watch. Thanks fer yer time all. Paul

Not the case. HSE listened to industry and adjusted their guidance on CS gloves accordingly...see earlier post. Cheers.. Paul

Hi there, SORRY late to teh party and haven't read all the posts so might repeat (ignore if so.) Check out HSE guidance INDG317 and AFAG 301 (see below) remembering these are minimum requirements and hence something more might be required on a site specific basis, i.e. SSRA (site specific risk assessment.) IN the ARbAC assessments we do question none use of some form of work glove for most ground ops, chainsaws / rigging / woodchipper etc., if observed which at least help to keep hands warm. Modern saws have front hand gaurds and chainbreaks etc. so HSE have accepted advnaces in technologies have removed the same level of need for chainsaw gloves (the old 'leather hide' ones were a nightmare, and hazard, when wet anyway!) Hope this helps and again apologies if repeats. Cheers.. Paul afag301.pdf indg317.pdf

Great post, thank you for doing so. This highlights a major concern I have with our industry that there is a broad acceptance of, what in many instances, are 'major' injuries that should at least be RECORDED in the 'accident book' ("yeah, right" YAWN, YAWN) and, in some instances, REPORTED under RIDDOR, i.e. more than 3 days off work. The 'accident book' is for everyone and, according to the guidance, ALL injuries should be recorded (unrealistic perhaps but, as a guide, anything involving the FA box other than a plaster, OR plaster + tape, should be recorded (NOT to be confused with reported under RIDDOR.). I know there is an issue surrounding form filling at the end of the day here when we just want to get home BUT in so doing you are highlighting a potential problem that may require adjustments to be made to your risk assessment and working practices = H&S Management (something, with all due repsect, we generally do very badly as an industry...IMHO!) Some businesses are thinking 'outside the box here' (well done My Jenks) in either having specific 'accident forms' within the vehicle pack OR, better still, an elctronic form on their I-Phones etc, OR even better still the office number that they ring and tell someone about the accident who then completes the form. EITHER way the H&S manager gets to know and can review things...THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT GUYS!!! Lastly, in terms of FA matters: 1. FA training should be 'relevant', i.e. covering deep lacerations / falls from height / crush injuries etc. 2. It should be refreshed every 18 months (I know tickets last 3 years BUT, hopefully, this is not a skill you practice too regularly and hence needs more regular refreshing...unlike chainsaw skills etc., another matter!) 3. FA kits (squad) should be 'relevant and appropriate' and, in the very least as no HSE spec. here, contain several medium/large wound dressings as 'blood-stoppers', along with protective gloves, AND be at hand, i.e. on the worksite (along with a bottle of clean water for rinsing etc.) 4. FA kits (personal) should be worn, or at least a large wound dressing in yer pocket at all times. 5. Emergency procedures be adequately addressed inc. aerial rescue / FA adminstration by who (cover him/her too, just in case) / contacting emergency services and getting them directly to you with getting lost or confused about your location / nearest A&E. Please take care out there, and don't simply accept hand-saw cuts as just part of the job...they're NOT!!! Cheers.. Paul PS Sorry for teh waffle but not done so for a while ('Hooray' I hear you say!)

Happy reading, and viewing tahnks to some excellent photographs submitted by industry photographic 'hot-dogs'..! (thanks David.) Cheers.. Paul

Apologies for my 'lateness' to the party here. HSE would say 'yes' you do need CS41 if your undertaking dismantling operations with rigging. However, this would not necessarily be the case for instance with CS40, CS45 (ground worker) or CS46 (pole chainsaw use) dependent on other qualifications / NPTCs held. They recognise that many NPTC CS units have been developed for specific markets and hence take a pragmatic view that it is only those deemed necessary under PUWER, for chainsaw and related works, and those operations that are 'high risk', i.e dismantling, where CoC should be held. Hope this clarifies things...a little. Cheers.. Paul PS This view is also supported by the 'ArbAC' scheme and CS41 is required by the person in the tree installing and connecting the rigging system (not the person on the ground who can be deemed 'competent' by their developed skills and expereince.)

Hi Chris, in general any level2 course, i.e. RFS Cert Arb / NC Arb / ISA Cert Arb(?) will be of greta benefit as a beginner. I'd speak withboth colleges and see whihc one works in best. GOOD LUCK and 'happy learning!' Paul

Excellent, sounds like the timing may just be right. Get working on your LA Tree Officers now to gain their support and nomination. Cheers.. Paul