AA Teccie (Paul)

Hmmm, my initial reaction here is that if she, the school H&S lady, rang us we would say the contractor should hold CS39 (as was) and CS41, if rigging is required, and as the stem / 'stick' is usually felled once the crown is removed then the appropriate felling qualification, e.g. CS31 or CS32/33 ("over 380mm dia.") would also be required. We would however confirm there is no tree size restriction for climbing and dismantling. Not sure this really helps your cause...and in stating the above I wholly recognize that many contractors are competent to fell trees over 380mm with only 'small tree felling' qual. but when dealing with H&S managers etc., and particularly if they have access to the PUWER ACOP (where all the quals are listed), you're going to come unstuck Paul PS Just read above and you say you wouldn't be felling the stem...hence don't need CS32. Tell her to call me (Paul Smith 01242 522152.)

Sympathies, having previously having had a broken toe, and bemusement, given the circumstances resulting in such ("yours" not mine...being football related) and hoping for your speedy recovery. Glad the Branch event went well and Jeremy's always a good presenter, oft very direct and contentious, but otherwise just very well informed and experienced. Look forward to hearing more on the accreditation process in the New Year...2019 hopefully Cheers Kevin, ATB.. Paul

"Glad to be of service"...if only occasionally Tbh it's occasionally referenced on UKTC for topic areas where the planning portal isn't particularly helpful or advice seems derived from it. Cheers Kevin, hope you're well. Paul

Hi Kevin, see below (I hope)...obviously now superseded by the planning portal. Regards, Paul tposguide.pdf

The revised 'Guide to Good Climbing Practice', more focused on access and descent techniques, will include SRT, based on Ben and Noddy's work, and should be available first quarter next year. Cheers, Paul

I think, at least some extent, the title of this thread is misleading, i.e. use of the word 'Beginners.' Whilst I acknowledge this is where the tree felling qualifications start the assessment process is quite expansive, having just observed my son going through it, and had he not had at least some tree felling experience so he understood the basics, he would have struggled more through the assessment. He did the associated training course and was able to focus on the less commonly used, but sometimes very useful, felling cuts with which he was less familiar. Certainly an 'eye-opener' for me and very, very different to my old CS10, 11, 12 units...not that I do any real work these days of course

An interesting, but perhaps not surprising, holding response from HSE here in that essentially whilst they too consider the risk of a cut to the leg to be 'very unlikely', thereby not necessitating / justifying chainsaw trousers use, if the employer's risk assessment process concludes otherwise then you are obliged either to do so...or get him to review it (this should be done in conjunction with yourself as the operator anyway, i.e. consultation and cooperation. ) Cheers, Paul PS In fairness, I'm not surprised the Tree Services Team wear chainsaw trousers whilst using them but this is doubtless entirely coincidental as they wear them to work anyway...hence it is normalized.

Just checking the City & Guilds / NPTC assessment schedule which, in relation to PPE, states: 2. Demonstrate knowledge of the safety clothing to wear when using the powered pole pruner PPE is subject to legislative/ HSE requirements and risk assessment but will normally include: - Safety boots - Gloves - Head, ear and eye protection - Non-snag outer clothing - Personal first aid kit - Appropriate support shoulder harness for machine No mention of chainsaw trousers. The full document is attached. CS48.pdf

Hi Roots, I guess "the norm" is use of the powered-polesaw will be preceded, or succeeded, by use of the / a chainsaw and hence PPE / trousers will be required...incidentally. However, if you only ever use the pp then your risk assessment is unlikely to result in chainsaw trousers being required. I will consult my colleague in HSE and get back to you. Regards, Paul

The 'test' a previous LPA I worked for was "would we have TPO'd it?" If not, prosecution was a non-starter, perhaps not unreasonably. If the answer was 'yes,' then they would ask is it in the public interest and unless was a persistent offender they would conclude no. If it was a persistent offender most likely was a formal caution, not prosecution...very frustrating, but! Cheers, Paul

Hi all, as I'm sure you're aware the "recommendation" for 5-yearly refresher training, as a professional operator, comes from HSE guidance (INDG 317) and FISA 805 Training & Certification (copy attached, see sects. 33-35.) ...and of course the previous stance / requirement by FISA for mandatory 5 yearly re-qualification, in effect, has emphasized the matter (plus the insurance industry will / can influence too.) Respectfully, we do often pick-up 'bad habits' along the working way and being in the company of an experienced, and competent, trainer, with a view to advancing our skill levels, can be beneficial. Whilst there are structured refresher courses available, mainly with Lantra and FISA, please do take the opportunity to 'up-skill,' e.g. CS31-CS32-CS33-CS34-CS35 (as was), where applicable as this will achieve both objectives. Alternatively, you could try to engage / employ a trainer to work with you to produce a more specific training needs analysis and then deliver a customized program to better suit your needs (and hopefully your pockets as, at least to some degree, the operators can hopefully stay productive.) This does still need to be documented, and ideally certificated, such that there is evidence of the training being undertaken and most providers can do this. It would be a real pity just to undertake, for instance, a small tree felling refresher and not advance your skill levels...after-all 380mm dia. isn't that big of a tree. Just another perspective appen.. Paul FISA 805 Training and Certs.pdf

Yep, CS32 & CS33 as was, now felling trees of 380mm dia. and above (and over 750mm dia.)

Well, ya learn summat new every day...many thanks for this Mr Dempsey Hopin yer well, Paul

A technique used where the chainsaw guide bar is smaller in length than the diameter of the tree. Hence you 'bore in' to the centre of the tree from the middle of the sink-cut / hinge and then, hopefully, match up when you bore in from the sides. Hopefully someone else can explain far better than I having not used the saw for...a few years Cheers, Paul

Reasonably, you could do these checks yourself but, ideally, some form of training should be undertaken (see https://ladderassociation.org.uk/training/ ) Keeping a sense of perspective here, the number of ladders sets, the frequency of use, the place of use, e.g. construction sites being a typical one, the level of user / operator, are all factors to consider in determining the level of training...and who needs to undertake it. So 'you' could do some formal training perhaps and then communicate the main points to staff via a Tool-box-Talk (TbT)...and record this on their personnel files. Cheers, Paul

Oh yes, but under PUWER rather than LOLER, and if you take them on a construction site they'll likely be looking for documented evidence of such. There's a couple of inspection forms below but there may be more, or updated ones, on the 'Help for Arborists' section of the website (but have to be a member, at least Ordinary/Foundation level (£65 p/yr) to access it.) If only occasional use I'd do the inspection as a recorded 'pre-use' (not point have lots of records when not used often enough to justify such.) Cheers, Paul Leaning-Ladder-Inspection-Record(July 2013).docx Step-Ladder-Inspection-Record(July 2013).docx

Hi Mark, probably not exactly what you were looking for but perhaps 'linking' here may help https://www.trees.org.uk/Help-Advice/Public/A-brief-guide-to-tree-work-terminology-and-definit Regards, Paul

An industry wide problem / challenge IME (feedback from contractors.) The phrase 'organic growth' comes to mind but that can take time and if your ambition is to grow quickly then I guess "pay rates" is an important consideration which of course can result in lowered profit margins from increased turn over...a conundrum. That said, many business do recruit and expand so clearly it can be done. Good luck (and if the expansion in the 'commercial world' is important for business sustainability then ARB Approval is probably worth a punt.) Cheers..! Paul

I hate going first, preferring to 2nd someone else (Mr Humphries), but G. resinaceum maybe / hopefully Paul

'ARB Approval' may be worth looking at if you wish to better position your business to access commercial work as it meets the H&S compliance requirements under the 'SSIP' banner. Hence commercial clients have a benchmark for your safety, and quality, performance. Many other business who have become ARB Approved have said it helped access commercial work, and not least as it gave them the confidence to so do. For 'FREE@ workshops to find out more see https://www.trees.org.uk/Training-And-Events Good luck.. Paul

Understand completely, just keep being selective and minimize the risk. Tc, Paul

Yeah, but Ratman is a Farmer's Friend and not the farmer himself, who may be exempted when working on his own land under Grand-father rights (pre-1998 I think) in effect. Tongue withdrawn...from cheek!

In essence 'yes' BUT in event of something going wrong, which I would suggest to be highly likely without any appropriate training being undertaken, you would doubtless find yourself in a very difficult position...more particularly without insurance working on land to which the public have a legitimate right to access. Further, if you haven't followed the requirements / recommendations set out in the PUWER ACOP, e.g. certificate of competence or nationally recognized qualification in chainsaw use, you would be expected to explain / demonstrate what alternative means of achieving competence you have employed / undertaken. Bottom line, not least because of the high level of risk to yourself...and more particularly as it sounds like the tree was wind blown perhaps (hence tension n compression wood is often unexpected / not anticipated), leave it to the experienced, insured, qualified and competent professionals...any takers? Paul

Perhaps raising more questions than answers but a point of note is that people undertaking 'detailed' tree inspections, i.e. as a competent person, need to ensure they are suitably qualified, experienced and insured. Happy reading.. CAVANAGH-v-WITLEY-PARISH-COUNCIL-SHEPHERD.docx.pdf

PS 'ARB Approval' (ARB Approved Contractor) is a specific tree surgery 'business' accreditation as opposed to AARC which is an individual as an arb consultant (not a practice either!)