AA Teccie (Paul)

As you may be aware John Flannigan (N. Somerset DC) has always promoted the for a UK 'Tree Commission' as opposed to 'Forestry Commission' to allow access to some of the funding they receive for arb specific programs That said after today there may not be any funds left to allocate. The AA would welcome the opporttunity to be involved. Regards.. Paul

Hi Andrew, I hope all's well. We do talk about CPD requirements, principally for managers, but as you quite rightly say it's important their staff are progressing too. The ISA CA scheme certainly does offer a very good opportuntiy for such but before they can implement it they would need to get staff through the exams AND thereafter support them in their CPD. IMO many compaines aren't quite ready for this at the moment as being 'small' can present challenges in sponsoring what is seen as none essentially training and CPD. Particularly in the current climate BUT I do see this as an investment opportuntiy and it would hopefully help with staff retention. that said some companies do it and it stands out during assesments. Cheers.. Paul

Was gonna say I thought Stihl, and prob Husky, did some techncial workshops you could attend, or is that just at the Arb Show & APF? May be worth contacting Hans Farley at Stihl and asking. Paul

Having previously studied the ISA Cert Arb course (but never did the exams) I completely vouch for its value, very good indeed (and I like, and agree, the way you refer to it as a level 2 qual requiring level 3 knowledge...here, here!) In terms of promoting it alongside AA Approved Contractor, and I know we do the same in the 'Choose Your Arborist' leaflet, it's a different thing really. In essence it is a (very good) individual's craftsman/technician level qualification but not a company accreditation...sorry stating the obvious here! Many of the AAAC managers hold the ISA Cert Arb qual and they always fare much better when it comes to the arb knowledge stuff asscoiated with the AAAC award. Whether the ISA Cert Arb is the way to go for 'RobArb' curently studying for his FdSc Arb, and then onto BSc, I dunno but I would certainly promote the ISA Cert Arb for practising arbs alongside their NPTCs...go frit n 'pm' Silver Back. Cheers.. Paul

Hi RobArb, No attempt to sway you the AA way, only to give a little more info. The ICF (the Institute of Chartered Forestors) as the name implies hold the Royal Charter for Forestry AND Arb in UK&I and hence are the only body able to award 'Chartered Arboriculturist' status to individuals (previously the awarded only chartered forester but now inc. arb too). They also award Chartered Environmentalist status separately if you desire such OR the AA can also award CEnv. if you see any benefit from such (to be quite honest I don't know how, or indeed if, the two awards differ within the separate organistaions in repsect of qualifying criteria.) The AA offer either higher level individual membership opportunities dependent upon qualification held, i.e. Ordinary / Associate / Tech Member / Prof Member / Fellow Member which is desigend to offer a career progression route to those who wish to follow that route. The alternative in terms of an individual competence accreditation, as I see it, for practising arboriculturist is AA Registered Consultant status which does require a level 4 qualification. Not sure that really helps you much as what you really seek is feedback from those who are, or who have been, members of either of both on their relative values and I can't answer that I'm afraid. I guess the Journals etc. will have more of an arb bias with the AA but the you seem keen to 'branch out' (boo hoo!) into the forestry side so that may benefit you further. Okay, as you can see, 'sales' is just not my bag but please ask away if you have any further questions. If you wanna call up the AA for a chat it's better to speak with Guy (Watson) as he is far more familiar with this. Thanks n good luck with your FdSc...braver man than me gungadin! Paul

Hi Bundle, The thinking behind it is that the research papers etc. are only made directly available to those who attended the conference. They are very likely however to be made available to a wider viewing audience via future 'Arb Journals'. Obvioulsy that then raises the issue that you have to be an AA member to access them, but that seems reasonable to me as the 'Arb Journal' is one of the major benefits of membership and becoming an AA member would benefit the industry at large, i.e. a bigger membership = a bigger voice and greater resource available. Cheers.. Paul

Think the proposal here is that the presentations will only be made available to delegates who attended the conference by using a password, to be issued, to access them....probably then to the 'highest Arbtalk bidder?', ha! Doubtless some of them will end up as papers published in the Arb Journal in the near future...fingers crossed! Cheers.. Paul

Not wanting to 'open a can of worms here' and I'm relaxin into the evening in a Prem Inn in Poole (very nice too but got 'elephant feet' in room above...aghhh!) Anyway the AA H&S Package (£45+p&p) contains several vehicle/machine checklist templates for checks etc. to help meet the PUWER requirements (along with lots of other really exciting stuff to!) Just for info, thanks all! Paul

Hi Charlie, I haven't done the ND so perhaps not the best reply but I can confirm the Tech Cert is quite challenging as I did that one! I guess the context(?) of the quals is quite different in that (possibly) the ND delivered in an college etc. approaches the subject from an acedemic / ideal perspective where perhaps the TC comes more from an applied one...dunno! Interested to hear what others say. Good luck if you go for it..! Paul

Cerne, Contact your training provider they should be able to help with a copy if you've registered with them. Paul

Just another quick thought as an alternative. Rather than managing the trees whihc would seem to be of very high ecological, wildlife and habitat value, could you not manage the (seemingly very occasional) targets by either re-routing the footpaths away from the trees OR excluding the targets (people) during inclement weather, i.e. high winds? Westonbirt and other gardens open to the public close when winds get over a certain speed...granted Counicl owned woodland would be very difficult. Dunno..? Paul. PS re the Basic Tree Inspection course it's essentially a basic 'tree hazard spotting' course for none professionals rather than a training course to become a professional, although all knowledge is good.

Absolutely, and sharing the load (or driving) is a sensible thing to do BUT you need to ensure the other chap is eligible to drive, i.e. has a valid licence, and ideally some form of training if driving anything differnt to a car (I guess this could reasonably be 'in-house' training by yourself as an experineced driver / 'trailer tower'). We advise contractors, ideally, to take an annual copy of driving licences and, whilst acknolwedging it may seem OTT and levaing it to the manager's discretion, get them to sign an anula statement confimring "I am eligible to drive, not being banned, and this is a true copy of my one and only driving licence". We advise this as some get a copy of their licence from DVLA before points are added. Cheers.. Paul

Dare I say that's a gender difference, gud'on'her..! Hope she's soon mended. Paul

Decompaction /aeration + mulch is a good start. Don't know how practical though. Unless tree safety / stability is comprimised I would avoid pruning, or certainly excessive pruning, at this stage, i.e. let the tree put all it's available energy into coping with the potentially damaged roots not 'defense' in relation to the pruning cuts generated. Paul

Honestly, IMO yes absolutely as all education is good (knowledge is power) BUT in this industry 'experience' counts for everything, well almost...even at the consultancy level I would suggest. You will find several previous threads on this topic...trouble is I don't know how to do that. Good luck..! Paul

Hi Lee, Fair comment! Generally speaking the risk assessment process should determine the need for a method statement (a 'plan of work') to be produced, often though the two things are combined. In general I'm concerned that many clients, particularly at the LA/commercial level, are asking for risk assessments and method statements as a matter of course and without the MS being really necessary. Principally the requirement for method statement production should be either: 1. On a construction site where other work activities are taking place (the idea being the 'site safety coordinator' can then better understand what the various contractors needs are and how best to coordinate them ensuring no conflicts or dangers.) or, 2. Where a 'complex' operation, perhaps for instance involving crane use, is to be undertaken which has a higher than usual level of risk involved. Sadly though clients see production of a MS as an extra safe gaurd for themselves or perhaps misunderstand the requirements for theer production, either way they're asked for too often AND inappropriately. Lastly if you do need to produce one there is a framework document available as a free download which appears to be being well received in various industries we service. Cheers, n hope all's well! Paul

Hi 'Quickthorn', Yup, it's called vicarious responsibility. Principally it would be applied if your employees were driving whilst disqualified (do you check their licences regularly?) but it could equally apply if a driver was found to be negligent in an acident and that was traced back to you as the employer not providing them with adequate training, and possibly refreshre training. This would particularly apply where they were driving unfamiliar vehciles, i.e. tractors / Unimogs, but also 3.5 tonners with trailers when they drive only cars usually. Sorry, didn't mean to be alarmist but it's worth bearing in mind. Paul

My boy convinced me to subscribe to Sky, to include Sports, on the basis of 'shared' costs...hmmm, we'll wait and see! However I watched 2 bl**dy great games over the weekend, Tri-Nations Aus v S. Afr. 39-41...fantastic and then Engalnd v NZ in womens rugby world cup final, we lost 13-10, but great game nonetheless. ESPN had the Aviva Rugby Prem. League highlights on Sunday....great back-to-back games at Twickers. Go frit! Paul

Hi William, The AA has a rep on EAC in Jonathon Cocking, AA Registered Consultant, just as a matter of interest. However in response to your question the EAC 'Treeworker' qual. has mutual recognition across Europe with the ISA Certifieed Arborist...or at least that's as I understand it. Reg Harris of Urban Forestry (Bury St Edmonds) arranged a recent course somewhere over that way, i.e. Suffolk, which was delivered by de Gouret Litchfield. That said the qual is not widely availbale in the UK because of the prevalance of other quals., i.e. NC Arb / RFS Cert Arb / C&Gs Arb Phase II / ISA Cert Arb etc., but it may become so in the future. Is it worth doing?...yes I'm sure it is, as any education is. Sorry for my ramblings.. Paul

Hi all, Refresher training eh?...a thorny issue IMO (and experience.) If I may I'd like to share with you the AAAC scheme requirements: Whilst we would expect the contractor concerned to have an appreciation and good understanding of the obsjectives of refresher/update training we would not expect to see every CS unit over 5 years old refreshed (and I don't believe the HSE would either.) However if we assessed a company who had the old CS10, 11, 12 & 20, 21, 22 etc., which were superceded approx. 12 years ago AND where changes have been incorporated into the units, we would expect to see refreshers and the 'new(er)' units in place (remembering of course that although 'training' is always advised you can put yourself straight forward for the NPTC assessment only.) We often recommend refresher training be taken in conjunction with 'new' training for a different/advanced NPTC unit, i.e. CS31 more than 5(?)/8/certainly 10 years old, to be 'advanced' to a CS32 (as was.) Similarly a CS39 can be advanced to CS41...or IMO a CS41 more than 5(?)/8/ceratinly 10 years old should be specifically refreshed as techniques and technologies have moved on considerably in this area. The other areas to consider for specific 'refreshers' are 'First Aid', annually (money well spent IMO), 'aerial rescue' (particularly with designated rescuers not regularly climbing...and in combination with regular practice), and as I inferred above 'rigging', particularly in light of the recent rigging research, and also climbing to some extent as things have moved on considerably over the years (although the latter two are 'updates' rather tha refreshers but same outcome = improved knowledge.) Being a H&S nurdy and recognising it's a potentially 'high risk' area I would also suggest, if budget allows, you consider driver refresher training as the consequences of bad habits and poor driving techniques can be very costly and if you are an employer, and not a limited company, you can have your licence endorsed if an employee is found to be at fault in an accident. Hoping this to be of interest. Cheers.. Paul

Travis, If Glynn Percival (Bartletts) was replying he'd say put mulch down and ideally as wood-chippings of the rosacea family which is high in sugars...apparently! If the ground is compacted then some decompaction work with the airspade would be his preferred tool. Sorry I know little of the subject but apparently this approach is supported by some research underatken by Glynn at Reading I believe. Cheers.. Paul

Dare I say if that approach is adopted, and whilst I see the logic, the reality in the curent climate is that the government would repeal the legislation and bin TPO's...hmmm. Interesting topic. Cheers.. Paul

Quality of the dog looks fine to me! Classic case of 4 legs being 'better' (more stable) than 2 eh! Great pic. Paul

Sorry, no definitive response here but I do recall a previous directive from central government to local government to pay invoices to small contractors in particular quicker, i.e. 30 days I think was the recommendation. I recall it as we used it as a prompt to make interim monthly payments fro longerterm contract works, i.e. 3-6 months. Not sure of any EU Directive tho. Cheers.. Paul