AA Teccie (Paul)

Porky...SORRY, n thanks for questionning me! What I'm trying to say is that as your practical skills advance, so should your associated arb knowledge. This will ensure your understanding of what your doing is in line with your ability to do it...WHAT??? Or put another way I would like to see all practising arborist with a minimum RFS Cert Arb etc, or higher, BUT more important (and what we test for AC) is the ability to demonstrate that understanding through speech..."Mrs Miggins you don't want to 'top' your Poplar tree in your garden as it's bad practice and doesn''t accord with industryt standards BECAUSE XYZ and this will mean ABC etc. etc. Paul (needing lessons in effective communication) Smith...not common but popular! Hope that makes (a little more) sense?

Is this 'tree management', in which case it may be questionable (albeit what else could you do?), OR is it (very tall) 'hedge management', in which case maybe you need to do a bit more?...dunno! Not every job fits in the classic BS3998 'et al' camp and, appropriate and suitable, adaptation/modification is part of the professionals role to interpret and apply standards as best possible. IMO the (most important) thing is to educate the client of the consequences/outcomes of the work proposed, then they can make an informed decision over whether to proceed or not, OR to consider the aletrantives you have proposed, again part of the professionals role. Oh yeah, n just to cover your posterior, and in partic if agianst BS3998 'et al'/industry good practice, I'd put it in writing too! (Got a 'lone' builder in at the momenty, eck of a good chap but recently got 'stung' for a job he did where the clinet wanted to cut corners to save money and altho this chap 'told' him what the future problems would be he didn't put it in writing and hence has just had his summer holdiay in Barbados cut short!) Sorry if 'off track/thread'...again! Paul

Sounds the basis for an interesting research project (does Mr Percival partake here?) I can't offer any 'pearls of wisdom' I'm afraid (but then that's probably no surprise) but on reading the threadth my thought immediatly lent towards gentle (air-spade?) excavations along the line of the proposed wall to expose roots and use a 'pier and lintel' (nearly spelt that wrong and refered you to a type of 'pulse) construction to 'bridge' the roots. Then it wouldn't matter if there's any increase in soil bulk density BUT thsi is probably to much work and inappropriate for dry stone walling. The othert thing struck me is tree species, i.e. London PLane can (nearly) bash its way through concrete so a bit of compacted soil along a specific line is 'easy peasy!' There, any other highly techncial questions I can('t) help with? 'D' hat n corner again Paul!!!

Yeah, just read it back, does come over a bit 'corny n overly-sentimental'...but hey, maybe I'm just that kinda guy! (that's the latter NOT former.) paul

Just needs placing on a busy road junction in the middle of the town...heck of a good traffic calmer....'come back Burtolin(?)' Paul

That makes me remember an instance when I was still 'on the tools' (fond memories) too many years ago and a neighbour took inspiration from me pruning nearby trees and decide to become a 'have a go yourself' but mucch to his great pain and my great amusement. He duly placed his ladders against the branch of an extended Cherry tree in his front garden, the right side of the cut (unlike the current TV ad...for summat) and merrily started to cut away. I was most impressed when he placed a step cut on the underside and then started his top cut (obviously he'd been watching the professional ('moi') next door) and it acted as a very efficient jump cut...wow, how good was that (but it quickly got much better from my point of view) as the wieght came off the end of the branch, and he was about half way along its length, the remainder, against whihc his ladder lent AT FULL EXTENSION, duly sprang upwards and......"bl**dy funny it was"! Thankfully he was only about 10ft of the ground and other than a sprained ankle his 'pride' was the most damaged thing. Needless to say as I left the site I popped a business card through his letter box (never heard tho, think he was too embarrassed!) Cheers.. Paul

Hi HighScale, congrats on your LA approval! For info, with the AC scheme we wholly acknowledge the HSE (here he goes...coffee n nap time!) requirement for 'refresher / update' training which specifically comes form the 'Management Regs' ACOP (Approved Code of Practice = the minimum level for legal compliance...broadly speaking) Reg.13(?) - Capabilities and Training, which talks about refersher training on a 'regular' basis and, I think its far to say, this is deemed particlaurly relevant to our industry where 'skilled and competent operatives' are our main controller of risks. This is then further endorsed by HSE at Sect.19 of AFAG 805 Training & Certification (worryingly, if all these references are correct, I din't need to look any of um up...AGHHHHH!!!!!) Anyway, in parctice, we wouldn't accept the old NPTC Units 20,21 & 22 as they miss out of certain key competnec areas included in their up-to-date equivalents (this includes take down of hung up trees and aerial rescue and obviously doesn't refelect updates in techniques and technologies...I know, "grannies, eggs n sucks"...sorry!) Hence we would encourage, we actually require, updates to address these. As several people have indicated perhaps doing the releavnt NPTC test only would suffice here BUT I would also strongly advise obtainments of additional comeptneceis, i.e. CS32 & CS41 in particular AND to do the training for these (more advanced units!) I would also try and make contact with a progressive and dynamic 'training provider', perhaps someone who's up-to-speed with current/modern rigging practices (and aware of the HSE/FC related research) for instance and consider some real 'refrehser / update' training which may not result in a NPTC certificate. The other thing of course, and 'yes' I know it's all well and good me banging on about it, but I would also think about your professioanl CPD moving in line with your advancing skills to ideally keep a parity. Hope this to be of help and not to 'ideally worldy'...AND if you want more (NO!!!!) just let me know. Good luck with it all. Paul

SORRY ALL...don't know what happened but I went in for an 'edit' before posting and it just disappeared...aghhhh...200 lines! What I also meant to include was that we would also give serious consideration to the circumsatnce surrounding the pruning and if, for instance, it was a heavy reduction because of structural defects or subsidence mitigation etc. this may be accpetable (provided it braodly followed the standard principles and practices) BUT we would always require to see at least one 'amenity type', as I refer to it, reduction. I also wanted to say "gudon'ya" to Hamadryad for having the confidence to post the photos to have them, efcetively, scrutinsed by your 'peers' BUT that's how we learn and improve/raise the bar and this way everyone benefits in that process. Again I 'take my hat off' to Arbtalk for facilitating this and you guys/guyesses for collectively contributing = as MonkeyD said recently this is 'THE Tree Community'! Paul

Eventually, I've got the opportunity to contribute AND I've found the thread (100 lines Paul must try harder with computers!) Obvioulsy there's been an awful lot of good contributions to this thread and I've just read the beginning and the end so I'll start by offering an AC assessment/audit of the works presented (BUT I will caveat this by saying whilst the photo's are very good you can never see everything until you've got the example in front of you, which obvioulsy I haven't. That said as well as having the 'example' in front of us on an assessment if there are 'before' and 'after' photo's, importantly taken from exactly (or more or less) the same point, this can be extremely useful and inform the audit process (NEBOSH 'anorak' speak!) Reet, so where do we start on an assessment (I hope this works): 1. Check the auditing criteria: 2.3 Crown reduction (MANDATORY) • appropriate spec (from contractor) • conforms to spec • correct cuts • correct finished result A specific ‘amenity type’ crown reduction operation is to be observed, i.e. 10-15% with the ‘rule of thirds’ applied unless otherwise specified. Accords with current BS3998 and European Tree Pruning Guide. 1.1. Can't really comment on the spec as not available = assumed yes! 1.2 As above in 1.1 1.3 Correct cuts (in terms of position, angle, size, accuracy, cleaness etc.) = again difficult to accurately assess without observation at closer quaters but the only thing I would readily comment on is, as I refer to it, the 'relationship of size' between the 'parent' (or removed) branch and the secondary (or retained) branch, i.e. 'the thirds rule' (meaning, the retained branch is at least 1/3rd the dia. of the removed branch...SORRY, "granny, eggs n sucks" again!) Whilst accepting this is not alwasy possible, Silver Maple is difficult and perhaps Beech to a lesser extent, it would appear from some photo's this hasn't always been achieved. This 'rule', as I refer to it, isn't include in BS3998 but is referred to in the Euorpean Tree Pruning Guide (ETPG), which I think is an excellent 'handbook' for tree pruning BUT very expensive as such..approx. 15 Euros (I think) and, I believe, a generally acknowledged and accepted rule. Whilst BS3998 1989doesn't state it specifically the illustration at Fig.2 supports this and it is included, in text, in the 'draft' BS3998. The BS3998 actually doesn't help tho by saying prune back to a side bud (or branch) which seems to conflict with this principle. Bottom line crown reducing back to 'twigs' often results in them failing and being 'blown off/wind thrown' and, effectively, leaves 'inter-nodal' cuts = deemed porr practice. 1.4 Correct finished result = difficult to say without having more infomration. was the objective to crown reduce maintaining the tree's original natural shape OR was it to reduce to reshape, i.e. to a potentially encourage a slightly difrerent form. Perhaps, with the Beech trees, their natural broad spreading habit has been changed to become more rounded and condensed. The Atlas Cedar ('neck on the line'!) has certainly been reshaped losing its natural form...but then what else can you do with a species with such a distinct form? So what would the outcome of the audit be 'NO' (below standard), 'YES' (at standard) or 'GOOD' (above standard) = YES/GOOD with some advisories offered along the above lines. This post may have missed the point, be irrelevant (hopefully not totally) or be 'on the money', so to speak, but I'm sure I'll find out very soon...gudon'yas! Cheers all.. Paul

If the PTI is with the AA, we'll send you instructions with the joining letter but as people have said its approx. 5 miles south of Coventry and fairly well signed posted off the A46 (BUT not in Gloucestershire!) as NAC. We will consider requests for training anywhere in the country if there's the minimum course numbers requiring it (usually 8no.) Cheers.. Paul PS You'll notice lots of 'Forestry Pruning' around the venue at Lantra House...and 'yes' Debbie (receptionist) and co. are quite nice....people!

Hi 'Hamadryad', Are you referring to the tree potetentially suffering from 'drought stress' during the summer heat and hence best not to prune and stress it further, risking it dying....or is there summat else I've missed? Thanks in anticpation.. Paul

Hi Chris, it isn't really ('significant'), the sap bleed, BUT no educated clients always relate to the tree 'bleeding' and if it has sentimental value this may be hard for the to stomach (sounds mad I know but I've been there.) Perhaps suggest continuing in mid-Summer when trees will 'bleed' much less, if at all, but then you risk the little 'flying things' scupperin the job if they decide to nest. Remeber also, something as an aside n Syccie is always pretty tough, that 'Shigo' would advocate avoiding pruning, in particular reductions, when the buds are swelling as it's a period of high (stored/potential) energy use to activate growth AND pruning has a 'double-whammy' effect in create wounds (requiring more energy use for 'defense') and removal of potnetial photosynthetic material, i.e. leaf supporting twigs and branches. Not always easy to get a workable solution from this, and loadsa pruning happens at this time of year with seemingly little effect, but it's something else to bear in mind. Good luck with it n gudon'ya for seeking advice! Cheersss. Paul

Thanks for the positive reply, much appreciated and as I say I just want poeple to be infomred of our proposals. To be honest, much of the inspiration is coming from you guys and the realisation there is a big 'arb' community our there with the same aim and objectives as we have...we just need to offer a viable route to facilitate it and pull it all together for everyone's benefit (sorry if I again sound like a politician here, and I'm anything but, I just want this industry to come together and move forward collectively, AND we have to listen and act...AND we will). Yup, an extra pair of hands would certainly help but for the time being we just have to do the best we can with what we've got. Cheers.. Paul

Hi all, hope no objections ot me posting here and this is entirely for infomration (but feel a tad nervous in so doing....still, here goes!) The AC scheme consultation talked about having 'core' elemnst for ALL ACs, inc. sectional felling/pruning/planting and then possibly additional 'optional' criteria for more speciliast work inc. veteran tree management etc. Another one was cable work and possibly fruit tree pruning. Not saying this will happen but, as with just about anything at the moment "its' in the melting pot!" Thanks all....gotta dash! Paul

Another interesting point of note is that wilst some 'broadbrush' expectations comethrough here each case seems determind entirley on its own merits and, as I understand it, none so far 'set a precendent' but act to inform only. Good stuff. Paul

Hi John, There's much discussion around this subject as to what could work and how etc. but one thing is absolutely clear in that ACs & RCs will have a, related, but distinctly identifiable logo recognising their achievement. The various memberhsip grades may be addressed as you describe. Thanks for your thoughts, please keep them coming. Paul

"Shhh Hama'd"...I'm teeling the boss it's under duress! Naaa, t'be honest it's been, and continues to be, a real 'eye opener' n Nicks supportin me all the way! Bring it on ! Paul

I'm extremely keen to listen what you say, consider what the standards require, AND reach a compromise to make it work without being over bureaucratic n 'paperwork for paperworks, BUT some is needed. We wanna engage with you (that's not a proposal BTW...ha!) and if weekend's good for you then weekend's good for me....sos a bit late today but 'Mummys Day' etc. n expectations....but apparnetly, apart from BBQing the carrots, mi Sunday lunch was pretty damn good (thanks goodness only once a year!) Cheers 'Skyhuck'.. Paul

Skyhuck.'SWB' & Hama'd, thanks for your posts and discussions. Provision of quotes IS part of the current standards, AND in terms of the tree work specification are a very good indication of knowledge etc. and competnece in terms of BS3998& ETPG (Euro Tree Pruning Guide). Absolutely NOT wanting to create a requirement for uncessary papaerowrk but, in part, provison of a written quote can separate out the 'good guys' form the bad...IN PART! What I would say is 'YES' you should for every job as the text book answer, however, in relaity and particularly with 'repeat customers', if you do it on the strength of a verbal agreement and a gentlemans hand-shake the gudon'ya, and you've probably operated that way for years (as you've said) BUT in the, albeit highly unlikely, event a customer wasn't ahhpy what you'd done was as described AND complained to the AA, then, in the absence of a written quote to base an opinion on, the likleyhood is we would say you have to go back and sort it....if you're happy to 'take that risk' then thats you're decision. A triplicate pad on site, hand written may be a good compromise? Cheers.. Paul

Hi Janey, THANK YOU for your comments I will ensure these are feedback to HSE/Treevolution as I consider them to be valid and valuable in further refinements of the course. If I may, as a matter of interest, and 'Yes' it was a plug for 'AAACs' but that's why I'm there...have you any direct comments for myself?...thank you! Paul

Mesterh, if I may add a contribution. When I deliver the RA training I promote/advocate the 'blank page' approach..."WHAT, that sounds good eh!" Basically, on arrival at the job, whilst you're having a fag or a coffee 'weighing it up', just list the first 5 obvious 'hazards/things to consider'...AND NOT chainsaws, chippers, grinders etc, coz they're all covered in your generics n everyone's trained n skilled up, BUT the 'greenhouse', the 'spiked railings', the nasty bitey dog in next doors garden/the poop all over the garden, the slippery/ice rink type patio arae covered in moss...blah, blah, blah (ha!) AND make sure they get transferred onto the SSRA form WITH, albeit very briefly, your controls, i.e. greenhouse=plyboards n rig that side, spiked fence = shutter off (somehow), dog sh*t = get owner to clear...,etc. etc. etc. n then make sure evreyone on site is breifed AND signs to demonstarte such ('your posterior protection' as the employer), then have your last 'fag drag/coffe slurp' n away ya go! That said our system does have a specific box for W@H assessment, to basically explaining why you're not in a MEWP, but this can be refined 'in-house' (n I explain how on the course) to make it a quick 'tick box' exercise....this was done to maintain HSE recognition of the system whihc is a (very) good thing to have! The RA course isn't the sexiest or most exciting day, n there's no 'dancing girls' (I can try if requested!) but it does now include a couple of outdorr exercises, whihc it didn't previously, and enduring IT and ME for ONE day, and paying £180(+VAT..sorry!) IS MONEY/TIME WELL INVESTED I BELIEVE! SORRY for Sat morning waffle...now I'm back to 'Swap Shop' n Mr Edmonds...if only! have agudun! Paul

Hey 'Mesterh', thanks for posting back. That simple form (kinda) for the site specifc risk assessment is available BUT I'm afraid you would have to come on the course as this not only covers the hazards and risk etc. covered by your existing NPTC competnece but alos introduces the legilsative requirements for RA (yawn , yawn, BUT important if you're an employer or engager of subbies) AND, more importantly introduces the system and how it works, how to implemnet it and how to maintain it. For the smaller, straight forward jobs, where as you say the clients won't request it you can propbably operate adequately from the generics with a good verbal brieifng on site. But, for the bigger, more complex jobs, EVEN I would suggest where you are a 'less tahn 5' employer/engager, a documented risk assessment would be a good failsafe. Once familair with the sytem, and it's in place, I reckon 5-10mins at the start of a job that's gonna last say at least half a day, typically, to do the RA and 'Emergency Contingencies' is time well spent. BUT then I would say that as I work for the AA, deliver the course, and I'm a 'NEBOSH' anorak....but I also believe, used correctly, a good RA systems prevents serious injuries and ensures, if they do happen, adequate arrangements are in place to deal with this. If you are interested I think there's still a couple of places left on the Chorley/Leyland course in early May. Cheers.. Paul

Hong Kong 'silk finish'?....Friday afternoon eh! Av a gudun..! P.

Hi all, 'feeling fruity eh?!' Although I know nothing, or at least very little, about FTP I'm lead to believe this organisation, whilst Devon based, has links up&down the country and hence may be worth a look and a contact. Orchard Link Home page Good luck..! Paul

David thank you. I, and the AA, simply want what we all do in 'good quality tree care' as the norm and a professional service (AKA 'THE Tree Community') undertaken by a united and coherent industry to benefit society, and I believe we are well placed to facilitate this...I do however wholly accept we need to 'up our game' and prove this, as we haven't done that great to date, but give us/me a chance and we will. Best regards.. Paul PS 'Awwww poor wittle pussies...miaowwww!'