AA Teccie (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 However if we assessed a company who had the old CS10, 11, 12 & 20, 21, 22 etc., which were superceded approx. 12 years ago AND where changes have been incorporated into the units, we would expect to see refreshers and the 'new(er)' units in place (remembering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

Is that a 'knock out' in the first round then??...hope not! I do have confidence in the scheme I manage and I do advocate use of AAAC contractors. The reality is that, similar to an MoT test on a car, provided the company demonstrates compliance and competence on the actual assessment, or reassessment day, the the status is awarded. Thereafter the primary responsibility to ensure the standards are maintained rests with the nominated manager (perhaps similar to the car owner/driver using the MoT analogy) who's knowledge and awareness has been (verbally) tested. The clause above is a standard legal clause and I believe you will find similar ones on other accreditation scheme websites ("yes", the reality is this is Association protecting itself as it's Trustees/Directors/members would expect.) The AAAC status is not, unfortunately, an absolute assurity of competence at all times BUT, importantly, is an extra layer of reassurance for the client/'buyer' that the company can operate to legilsative and industry standards. The primary responsibility lies with those engaging / appointing the contractor to do all that is 'reasonable' to ensure they are suitable and competent. Choosing a contractor approved by an industry body would certainly assist here. The complaints procedure is not currently available on the AA website as it is being reviewed. However there is a hard copy in the 2010 Directory of AARCs & AAACs and I am happy to supply a pdf to anyone who requires a copy (please email me directly [email protected]) Thanks for the post. Paul

Ooops...that's why this website is spot on as there's always someone who knows better AND they're always willing to share that knowledge....FOC! Yet another example of such a fantastic resource. Thanks Hama.. Paul

Hi all, As a PTI instructor, the course is principally an opportunity to demonstrate 'competence' through assessment, i.e. via the Lantra Awards ITA (Integrated Training and Assessment) route. That said, and as has already been pointed out, there isn't a great deal of 'training' takes place as such except for the recording element of the inspection. Hence candidates should present themselves 'fore-armed' with the necessary knowledge and experience. Whilst not essential, those candidiates who have the Tech Cert, or similar, under their belt plus a couple of years experience of surveying/inspecting "in the field" certainly fare better on the whole. That said some candidates do attend principally to understand where they need to improve knowledge and expereince and to what level to enable future success, assuming of course they don't meet the standard on the first attempt. Increasingly awareness of the PTI 'qualification', which strictly it isn't as its not gone through due process with QCA (Quals. & Curriculum Authority), is growing and now starting to appear as either a prerequisite or 'desirable' criteria on tree inspection vacancies or contracts. There are various providers of the PTI course but the Association certainly delivers its fair share so please contact us/me fro further info. Thanks all. Paul PS Interestingly (???) it is possible to exceed the course pass mark of 70% overall but still fail it if you fluff either of the 2x tree inspections exercises...a very difficult result for the candidate to stomach!

Hi Drayton Tree Care, Further to my previous reply I assume you're looking for comments from the industry itself, and quite right too, rather than those who operate the scheme, i.e. 'me/the AA'. Obviously I'm always available to give specific advice/guidance about the AAAC scheme and I hope the contributors give a fair view and highlight within that the balance we seek to achieve between (necessary and relevant) paperwork, safe and competent tree work operations (sectional felling with rigging), good tree pruning standards (crown reductions and crown thinnings)and 'reasonable/adequate' arboricultural knowledge to underpin the practices (although NOT requiring a formal qualification.) If anyone's been through the assessment process recently it'd be good to give some feedback about what's involved and how close to having the balance right between 'writing' and 'doing' we currently are (remembering of course that now we dual award with the CHAS scheme we have to dot the "i's" and cross the "t's" for H&S!) Thanks in anticipation and "ding, ding...Round 1"! Cheers.. Paul

IN my experience, although not aware of any proven associations, I would typically expect to see Inonotus hispidus on an Ash tree of this size, age and condition, and often side by side with Daldinia, so may be worth keeping an eye out over the coming weeks by giving the bino's an outing. Regards.. Paul

Hmmm, upto reading Josh's comments above I was reacting thinking 2m reduction isn't excessive. However when you think that equates to 4m off the lateral spread it gives a different perspective...still! I often hear form contractors that LA TOs don't allow reductions 'carte blanche' but I don't understand this, it should be each applictaion on it's merits and consent/refusal individually. Collectively contractors within a tree officer area could challenge this as a Counicl policy. Obvioulsy reductions,by there very nature, reduce the associated tree visual amenity, and hence I can understand their reluctance, BUT in certain situations (such as this one) a 'light' reduction, perhaps 1-2m, would/should be acceptable...hmmm! Anyway a couple of additional comments. You would not / should not need to apply if the Council has indicated 'selective reduction' would be acceptable as this, I would (strongly) suggest, is a lesser form of what you have applied for and they could conditionally consent to this. Thereby avoiding the delays of another application. Also, you don't need to apply to deadwood...but it is useful to notify them out of courtesy. Lastly, as Tony indicated, you could let the aplication run its course and receive the refusal and then appeal. Not that I'm advocating appealing 'whilly nilly' but where you've got a carte blanche applied rule to challenge a run of appeals could be just what's required. Hoping this to be of help. Good luck. Paul

Hi Drayton Tree Care, Firstly I would give Tiff a call at the Arb Association and ask her to post you an information/application pack which will include the currents standards (see http://www.trees.org.uk/c.793499/aa/documents/aaactcs_v7-2_0110.pdf) Once you're satisfied the business can demonstrate compliance in all areas complete the form and submit with the relevant fee (approx. £870+VAT). Also PLEASE PLEASE plan and prepare well for the assessment day ensuring all that we need to see is available, and ideally close by to keep travel time to a minimum (even if this means askng your local landowner/Local Authority if you can crown thin and/or crown reduce a few trees for the purposes of the assessment, not ideal I know but a better option than having to undertake a revisit, at cost to you, if you aren't able to show us from recent jobs what the standards require.) If you need any help or assistance please don't hesitate to contact me AND if you are a firm of 'less than 5 staff' (a combination of PAYE + regular subcontractors) then it might be worth holding on for a while as things are changing and the likelihood is that from 1st Jan. 2011 you will be able to apply as a small company which will cost less and require less on the paperwork evidence side of things. Give me a call if you want to chat further. Thanks for the post..! Paul Paul Smith AAAC manager tel. 01242 522152

Whilst in principle I'd agree with Bob given the bark necrosis present there doesn't apear to be any active 'oozing' /bleeding as I would expect to see. Can't help thinking some mechanical damage may have alos been inccured by the trees given the type of damage and their location and the (seemingly)recent addition to the perimeter fence with the security bits on top...dunno! Watch and see..? Cheers.. Paul

Ricky, The ND Arb (National Diploma in Arboriculture), or Technicians Certificate in Arboriculture, are both level 3 quals., full-time & part-time respectively, but both usually require either the National Certificate in Arb or RFS Cert Arb as an entry level qual. I still think, from what you said originally, the RFS Cert Arb or ISA Certified Arborist, another very well recognised course of study (usually home study I think), would be your best option at this stage...just my thoughts! The contact on an arb course at your nearest land based college, as i mentioned, would hopefully open up networking opportunities which may lead to at least some work hopefully. Paul

Ricky, You could consider the 'RFS Cert Arb' (Royal Forestry Society 'Certificate in Arboriculture'), a recognised level 2 (craftsman) acedemic / technical qualification to compliment your existing NPTC quals. It's very well recognised in the industry at the craftsman/operative level and would/should improve your knowedge of trees and arboriculture generally. Not sure about the machinery side of things though, probably that's more hands on or agric mechanic(ing) course. The RFS Cert Arb can be self study, via Hort Correspondence College, or worth making the effort to a land based college I would suggest to then allow for net-working opportunities whihc may bring some work, or at least some good suggestions, your way. Good luck..! Post back if you want any more info (to be sure I catch any 'post back' easire to go via AA forum box as then drops straight to my 'in-box'.) Cheers.. Paul

Perhaps, if it's a moral dilema you're encountering which I fully understand, you could drop them a line on plain paper, i.e. not a business card, and leave the decision with them. Obvioulsy thop if the following week you saw another contractor working on the tree it would grind somewhat. Dunno, it's a "tricky un!" Cheers.. paul

As Mozza advises above I too have seen many HC like this and not associated it with problems. That is provided of course it;s restricted to the bark layer and not the wood, i.e. possibly bark incremental expansion and not an actual split/crack in the wood. I guess it could also be the early onset of the bleeding canker but is seems to straight and regular for that with no obvious 'bleeding'. To prune or not to prune?...hmmm, how's business at the moment?! Cheers.. Paul

Know it's probably a "yeah right, get real Paul!" reply but I see this being a Ts & Cs thing in that IF, on arrival at the worksite, dog excrement is present requiring clearing from the worksite (BUT not removal from the property) a £50 additional fee will be chargable. You would need a quote acceptance system that involved them signing a 'chitty' (usually a tear off slip) both accepting the quote AND the Ts & Cs. I would also draw their attention to this on the front cover of the written quote (a brief description and refering to the specifc T&C) and, if on arrival at the worksite you were greeted by 'the problem', take photographic evidence of before and after. My best suggestion I'm afraid...to a very difficult problem Good luck. Paul PS Don't forget to address it on the site risk assessment too....aghhhh, bl**dy H&S bods!

Hi all, hope you're keeping well. Sorry not been around for a while but I've been very busily 'otherwise engaged' recently and on hols for the last couple of weeks or so (Spain was great but for how long can they continue to celebrate winning the world cup....ALL night long!) Referring to an ealrier comment I acknowledge that, other than the status of 'AAAC' and use of the logo etc., the AA currently gives little in the way of extras. However we do regularly send HSE/H&S updates electronically and other related information periodically. Plus we are only a phone call away from offering arb technicla advice which, whilst available to all AA members, is most frequently used by AAACs. However in terms of doing something REALLY useful its a numbers game I'm afraid, i.e the more members/AAACs we have the more we can do. After having said that I acknowledge we need to do more / offer more in the first instance to make it finanicially worthwhile and beneficial to your businesses (hence my recent exploits.) Please do bear with me a little longer and I believe we will have a package available that has much greater appeal, particularly to the smaller contractor, than what we have currently...thank you! The other thing tho is that almost all contractors, regardless of a positive or negative outcome to the assessment process, cite the vist and audit as being initially quiet daunting BUT afterwards a very positive and useful experience with lots of good advice and feedback offered. Plus of course further guidance and direction on how to improve...that's gotta be worth summat surely! Re - The Tree Contractors Directory, my understanding is that this is as the name implies 'a Directory', albeit with a great web presence and very good presentation, but it does not undertake any level of checking of standards or compliance of a contractors performance (or at least I don't think it does.) Cheers all.. Paul

Excellent, hope the course goes well for you...if not, for nay reasons, please do let me know. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Sal, Please see Arboricultural Knowledge - Training for details of next course. The format, to be quite honest, involves sitting in a classroom for a full day of fairly 'hefty' stuff...albeit very interesting but quite challenging, potentially. IMO you need to come with one of two mindsets in order to benefit: 1. As a new learner - treating the course as a 'sign-post' day advising you of where you need to be in order to attain the necessary knowledge for the orle of AA Approved Contractor manager etc. 2. As an existing learner - treating the course as a 'tester' of where your knowledge is at currently and highlighting any areas for improvement/update etc. The course does not aim to teach you what you need to know, i.e. impart all the necessary infomration for the various topics covered, as that coul dtake a full year of a Tech Cert. course etc. Hoping this to be of help. Good luck..! Paul

Hi Andrew, I'm not aware of any recent books on tree pruning techniques which is probably indicative that not much has changed recently. Natural Target Pruning still 'rules the day' I think but many still need to catch up with that (based on previous AC assessments.) The European Tree Pruning Guide (2005) and the 'pending' revised BS3998 are the most recent I'm aware of. Cheers.. Paul

I'd leave the bar (WHAT AM I Saying????...OH YEAH WEIGHTS) n go for the dumbells for a while, including incline presses. Good luck...alternative = a 'wonder bra'? Paul

Hi all, sorry not been around for a while ("no worries Paul!" did I hear you say?..ha) Had an interesting chat about this the other day when a potential loophole (yet to be substantiated) was uncovered to continue the use of AS but as a tree stump treatment ONLY and not as a herbicide and not for typcial herbicide uses, i.e. weedkiller of perniceous woody perennials. The chap reckoned his supplier had said they could still do so (supply) provided they didn't refer to it as a herbicide and indicated it as a tree stump ONLY treatment. If this is so then it may mean we can continue to purchase and use it BUT I do need to confirm such with HSE/Pesticide Authority. Paul