AA Teccie (Paul)

Wouldn't have bothered 'Resistographing' when already condemned BUT instruction to fell, presumably coz suspected extensive decay in butt, and detailed 'VTA' should have indicated all was not well internally. In terms of "just getting on with it" and climbing it, IF anything had gone untoward (unlikley perhaps) AND it was an employee climbing (OR possibly yourself from a personal accident claim perspective) you would probably find it very difficult to defend under the 'Work at Height' hierarchical approach I would suggest even if it wasn't directly related to tree structural condition. In summary: FIRST - ground level work (straight fell was probably an option as campers could have been moved) SECOND - MEWP (could have been used as access available and ground suitably hard etc.) THIRD - climb (most would...BUT! At least here there was no rigging and you were able to work close to the stem whilst removing branches) In terms of monolithing (if such a word) I don;t think it would have stood for long and so removal was probably best option...unless it could have been fenced off maybe....dunno! Cheers.. Paul

Tony, indeed, clarification of what is everything (see attached). I beleive we are entering a period of transition in rolling out this message and I see the BS3998 seminars as part of this process. Realistically I reckong anything upto 18months before we see specs reflecting the intentions of the standard. Thanks for your post. Paul PS THANK YOU to 'Aspect Tree Consultancy' of S. Devon (Dom Scanlon, Jon kiely and Chris Widdicombe for the illustartion AND invalubale input in producing the seminar content!) TreeCrownVolumeIllus.pdf

Tony, I don't beleive the standard seeks to remove the climbers judgement as the person in the top of the tree looking for the best position to prune back to. However under the current regime we see a very wide interpretation of, say, a 30% reduction of 20m (high) x 10m (wide) tree. Firstly is it: 1. Tree height reduction 2. Tree crown radial reduction 3. Tree crown volume reduction ...as these are very different but all are valid as a 'reduction'. Secondly 30% (this is down to the climbers interpretation and can vary widely, hence some more detailed guidance is needed.) 1. Remaining tree = 14m high. 2. Remaining tree = approx. 17m high (taking 'rounded' 10m crown, for instance) 3. Remaining tree = approx. 19m high (taking the BS3998 guidance that a 30% crwon volume reduction equate to approx. 12% radial reduction) The above is a very rushed, and not a well thought out reply, but I hope it serves, at least in part, to illustrate why we need to be more prescriptive, not arguing over a few centimeters here and there, for the benefit of all. We will never be producing for instance an engineering type spec for tree work, as you quite rightly state the standard is a guide, BUT use of terms such as "30% reduction" is 'imprecise and unsatisfactory'...in the words of BS3998 2010. I see this as an opportunity for the industry to get on board and raise the professionalism bar, again to further marginalise the not so professional. I sincerely hope the industry is 'on board' here...and nothing (directly) to do with 'ARB Approval', but whilst you are pruning to this standard you may as well...STOP IT!!! Thanks for your post. Paul

Hi Paul (hope yer well!) Your right "it's not the law"...until it's condition in a TPO consent and then, effectively, it is. Nonetheless, 'love it or lothe it', it is "industry best practice" and ignore it at our peril...or more particularly put "ALL WORK TO BS3998" on our business stationary and then diverge from it kinda misses the point. This is an opportunity to yet again raise the professional standing and status of our industry and further marginalise the 'less scrupulous'. The seminars are useful and at 50 quid a throw (+VAT, sadly!) hopefully within the grasp of most. Next ones are due Tuesday 6th September (LAntra House, Stoneleigh Park nr. Warwick) and Wed. 7th Sept. (CApel Manor) and they'll be on the AA website soon. Regarding further guidance on tree work specs, the arb consulatncy who developed the training course 'Aspect Tree Consultancy' (Devon), and who have a very strong parctical industry background, are working on guidance which we hope will be available soon. Thanks all.. Paul PS SOrry Paul, just picked your post for the subject matter nowt else.

Wow, welcome to the AA shop everyone, real sorry I'm so late to the party but only returned from Justins show late last night. I can't possibly answer all the very valid points and comments raised (thank you) and thansk to Ben for raising the issue. Bottom line I'm not naive enough to think 'ArbACs' get things right all of the time but by having gone through the process of assessment they've demonstarted they know how things should be, AND they can demo getting things right, and (hopefully) they do do things right most of the time. Regarding the issue of vehicles and overloading, simply IF, on the day of assessment, we observe this (usually by seeing a stonking big pile of chip on board and looking at the springs) we will raise the issue and recommend they visit their local weighbride to 'enlighten' themsleves before 'Mr Plod' does and avoid similar overloading in the future. IF however we don't see this we may dicsuss the issue BUT there are other far more important issues that the scheme concerns itself with, not least as there are other authorities (NOT that the AA are an authority but 'figure of speech'...sorry!) far better placed than the AA to deal with such matters. Regarding H&S in general, this is a 'culture' thing that should prevail in any business and it's implentation is a balance, along with everything else a business needs to do...including earn money! The AA website (see Help becoming an ARB Approved Contractor PLEASE don't be put off coz it says 'Help bcoming an ArbAC' this applies equally to ALL businesses!) can now help you put a basic H&S document framework in place but the 'culture' is down to you. IMHO the most important part of the H&S system is the site risk assessment, and accompanying method statement if applicable, so this is the part to major on and, in my expereince, it's the part that is often below the standard it needs to be. Potentialy this document alone will avoid accidents and prevent injuries, please don;t overlook it. Sorry, bit of a short respones considering what's gone before and as a parting shot please don't judge the scheme by your previous expereince of working for an ArbAC who perhaps ran overloaded, not to say that's okay by any means, but the scheme and the ethos behind it is about so much more. Thanks all and excuse if I donl;t reply for a couple fo weeks (or so) as I'm takin some time to reintroduce myself to the family and hopefully in sunnier climes. Take care out there and good to see those who I did at the SE show...great British weather prevailed! Cheers.. Paul

Ha ha...hope you're 'good lady' appreciated the outcome too! Cheers Terry, tc! Paul

Firstly, THANK YOU Terry for your balanced and pragmatic view voiced here, it is much appreciated and I'm pleased to learn you found the assessment process useful in improving the business. I alos hope, in the fullness of time, it does prove fruitful for you and you reap financial benefits. (BTW I take it you found your way back to Cirencester safe and well after the 'ARB Show'...bl**dy AA moving the site....a further 1 1/2 miles away!!!) Secondly I'm most frustrated to learn of another LA TO who has declined the opportunity to nominate, and help, a good local contractor 'on their way', so to speak, because of concerns of favouritism and preferential treatment. Surely LAs and TOs have duty to promote to their local communities (AND trees) reputable tree care businesses undertaking good quality work if not directly, then indirectly via the AA website...once said contarctors have become ARB Approved of course! IF they feel compromised then they could nominate ALL small businesses they have contact with, perhaps avoiding those they've had to prosecute for TPO breaches of course, and then at least yours would appear 'on the radar' and be in with a chance. Sorry, no solutions here but it is a mad world we live in sometimes...ah well! Cheers all.. Paul

The 4 Ds...is actually 3! DEAD (Should be obvious), DYING (Almost DEAD so equally should be obvious), DANGEROUS (hmmm, remember the presumption you are guilty here until 'YOU' prove yourself innonence...lots of piccies n good arb knowledge.) REMEMBER also under the 'D,D,D' exemption there is an automatic requirement to replacement plant, 1 for 1. Cheers.. Paul PS, sorry almost forgot 'DISEASED' is not included in the 'Ds'. PPS see Sect. 9.3 of the 'blue book' here Tree Preservation Orders: A Guide to the Law and Good Practice - Planning, building and the environment - Department for Communities and Local Government PPS Whilst preferred by LPAs you don't need to use the 1APP form for Sect. 211 Notices (AKA Conservation Area Notifications) PPPS I'll go now...bye!!!!

HI Rob, greta to meet you on Tuesday, thanks for your intro! The 'DoC' is principally the tree owners, whoever that might be. However if the tree were to fail, and cause injury.harm.loss etc., then the owner would be potentially entitled to sue the 'last professional' at the site for breach of professional duty (assuming the defect to be the cause of the failure and the fact that failure was 'forseeable' AND bearing in mind the level of evidence required in a civil case would be 'on the balance of probabilities', i.e.51%, rather than as with criminal law of 'beyond reasonable doubt' i.e. 90+%'. Obvioulsy this reply is 'my' interpretation of the prevailing law her and not a legal definitive (sorry, don;t usually caveat commnets but seemed appropriate to do so here.) Hope this helps...at least a little. Paul

VERY handy, be sure to check out the Fungi & Knots Directory too, they're excellent (not that I understand knots these days as no-one seems to bother with a prussik and figure of eight anymore, ha!) Enjoy.. Paul

Hi Terry, Yep, you got it right as whilst a '2010' standard it, effectively, only went live Jan. 2011 as released on 31st December...phew! Hope you're well. Cheers.. Paul

Not an '8 month old' insomaniac but, by my recollection (as a Dad too), a 'selective sleeper'...i.e. selects to sleep when you're at work, ha! Good luck n don't forget the match-sticks (jokin apart take care out there, sleep deprivation is very difficult!) Cheers.. Paul

Hi Ben, no problem...next time maybe! I assume you are talking about the BS3998 seminars? We did do one at the South of England Showground recently and the original one was in Devon. The nearest potentially you may get a future one is Capel Manor but that's not an absolute at the moment. Will keep the forum posted. Cheers.. Paul

Certainly looks 'ArbAC' quality ("go on, you know you want to, ha!") AS matter of interest tho, and acknowledging you probably didn't spec it, but under the revised BS3998 regime the reference to 15% is deemed inprecise and potentially misleading as it could be interpreted differnt ways in terms of height reduction, full crown 'linear' reduction or full crown 'volume'. Further more there is then the interpretation by the climber of how much is 15%, so much scope to misinterpret and, dare I say, 'over prune' (NOT that I think that's the case here.) Anyhow, 'well done', gud'on'ya for posting (that's one thing, amongst many others, I like about 'ARBTALK' (thanks again Steve B...& co.))...and let me know where to send the 'ArbAC' application?...tee hee! Lastly IF the intention was a 15% crown volume reduction, using the BS3998 (2010) reference to 30% being equivalent to 12% linear, that would have meant about 6-8% linear measurement...wahtever that works out at! Cheers.. Paul PS Oh yeah, re the "snappy bits".....MEWP?

As a matter of interest, AND great if you're an insomniac, I attach a copy of an article from the latest 'ARB Mag' on the BS3998 seminars were are currently delivering AND, with grand permission of BSI, a 'summary of contents' of the actual document itself (which is simply an expanded version of the document contents pages.) Hopefully this will give you the opportuntiy, to some extent, to 'compare and contrast' the 2010 doc. against the '89' one and reassure yourself you need to purchase a copy...or visit your local library to view it. Cheers n 'happy reading'..! Paul PS We still have places available on the Welsh events next week, Tues. @ Wrexham & Thurs. @ Carmarthen, and they are, effectively, FoC (you just need to complete the booking form and provide credit card details...this will only be charged if you DON'T attend the event.) PPS If you align your business with the current standard you are about 9/10ths of the way to achieving 'ARB Approved Contractor' status..."THERE HE GOES AGAIN!!!" BS3998GN(v2).docx BS3998article.docx

HAZARD AND RISK ASSESSMENT (extract from AA 'A Guide to use of MEWPs in Arboriculture'...cost = £5) Not a usual format risk assessment but a very good starting point I would suggest. The guide also contains a 'work site assessment' form which is also worth a look. Cheers all.. Paul GUMA-Appendix 2 p54-56.pdf

Yup, I'd 2nd 'SKyhuck' presumption BUT would still double-check! Cheers.. Paul

Hi there, It was the 'ARB Approved Contractor' (ArbAC) Preparation Workshop for those contractors interested in achieving the accreditation. This one in particular was principally, but not exclsuively, aimed at small businesses seeking approval and was offered free (to ALL regardless of business size) as part of the 'promotion' which potentially offers them a 'free' assessment. Unfortunately we've flagged it up a few times here, on AA Facebook page and on AA website, but not enough takers to make it viable and we've now ahd to cancel the venue before significant cost were incurred. We will run another workshop in the future. Cheers.. Paul

Excellent, look forward to it! Cheers Hama.. Paul

Okay, sorry....Ooops, ha! Report back soon.. Cheers Hama. Paul

Sorry to those intending to come along but, due to lack of numbers hence not viable, we've had to cancel this event. We will try again in the future giving people more notice. Thanks for your interest and apologies for any inconvenience caused. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Samwise, If, as I think, you are referring to the Euro. Tree Worker qualification then I beleive the only one so far in the UK took place earlier in the year at BTS (Ipswich.) You may wish to enquire with Reg Harris of Urban Forestry (Bury-ST-Edmonds) as I think he both helped organise it and attended it (email Reg Harris [[email protected]] ) Good luck. Paul

Teccie, Teccie...where r u????....SORRY AGAIN!!! SOunds as tho you may be sorted now but I'm sure there's summat along these lines in the MEWPs Guide so will check if we have it as separate word doc. and post it later in the week. Cheers.. Paul