AA Teccie (Paul)

Hi Ben, Whilst the reduction is quite symmetrical, and thereby aesthetically pleasing to the clients / tree owner perhaps, unfortunately it does not accord with the industry standard BS3998(2010) Recommendations for Tree Work as it is deemed excessive. This means there are no suitable secondary growth points, i.e. smaller side branches which are at least 1/3rd the diameter of the parent branch, for sustained / continued growth. The likely response, provided the tree has good vitality and adequate energy reserves, is a proliferation of regrowth which will create future management problems. Now, provided the client is fully aware of this and doesn't want to follow your best professional advice otherwise, i.e. a lighter crown reduction overall and maybe 'heavier' over the houses (or phased pruning, very difficult to convince) AND, ideally, you point out the work doesn't comply with the BS, then its your choice whether to accept the job or not. Hope this helps the understanding a little. Cheers.. Paul

Usefully, the new TPO guidance makes reference to dangerous 'branches' as an exception as well as trees. See Dangerous trees and branches | National Planning Practice Guidance Cheers.. Paul PS I hope this url shortens on posting. PPS Thankfully it has...PHEW!

Thanks all for encouraging remarks about the AA field guides, and indeed for contributions to ('Mr Humphries'). It's really good to get confirmation that it's useful and helpful to practitioners. Can I also make a plug for Mathecks "Manual of Wood Decay in Trees" which gives a deeper insight to trees n fungi and explains modes of decay etc. very well indeed (highly recommended I would say.) See Manual of Wood Decays in Trees Cheers.. Paul

BUMP...BANG...CRASH...whichever reminds all. Cheers.. Paul

Gents, as I have previously "cross-pollinated" industry forums where appropriate, and as I can offer very little contribution here, if there are unaddressed issues you are keen to pursue it might be worth widening your 'range of engagement'...if you get my gist (if not try here tree-care.info :: tree-care.info ) Regards.. Paul

Significance...looks, n sometimes smells, worse than it is? Thanks David. Paul

One for 'Arbocop' me thinks...Kevin where are you? Paul

Hi there, apologies for my delay. In terms of re-training, as you say refreshers are often useful, but unless you hold the actual Street Works Licence, which I'm sure probably does expire after 3-5 years, I believe the training remains current. The 'book', as such, is electronically available as posted so maybe you don't need to buy one...maybe even you can't, I'm not sure yet. Thanks for your response. Cheers.. Paul

Amazing, thank you. I noticed Tony Croft (AKA Hamadryad) inferred in a post yesterday that he is looking to invest in something similar so may also soon be able to contribute. I recall meeting a HC Leaf Miner 'face to face', at least on screen, at a previous conference where Bartlett's where using a very strong electro-microscope. Again, thank you for taking the time and for explain the slides...fascinating. Cheers.. Paul

PHEW...don't feel quite so 'inadequate' now Cheers Tony Paul

Excellent news...a RESULT. I'll 'pm' you. Thanks Iain. Paul

Hi Will, I would generally describe this as a 'canker' but it could be referred to as a bud proliferation too...I think. In my experience, whilst I have seen it on Sycamore, I have ore commonly seen it, or something very similar, on the Red Chestnut (Aesculus carnea) where it sometimes completely girdles the stem causing cambium dysfunction and associated decay which can result in stem failure...and often did during storms. Still, not sure how that compares on Sycamore so let's wait until someone more knowledgeable comes along and enlightens us both. Cheers.. Paul

I can highly recommend the AAAC accreditation scheme AND I would offer the pleasure of myself as the assessor...provided you start my day off with a hearty full 'Yorkshire' breakfast Cheers Iain. Paul

Not gonna tel... T'b'onest nothing significant really. We have included specific reference to the Welfare Regs in terms of what arrangements in place which was raised during the SSiP audit. Other than that just some reformatting and clarifications. The update link in the first post expands a little more. Thanks fer askin. Cheers Iain. Paul PS Not rec'd your 'Teccie' application yet?

Hi all, ARB Approved Contractor Standards ? Update - - Arboricultural Association Just for information really and particularly if anyone is 'working towards' ArbAC status and/or uses the standards to benchmark their business (remembering that HSE recognise them as an industry benchmark for compliance...more particularly as the scheme is now registered with the national safety schemes forum 'SSiP'.) Happy reading (and, as always, I'm happy to field any questions, concerns and/or criticisms) Cheers all.. Paul Standards-5-or-more-employees-FINALv3(131011).pdf.docx Standards-less-than-5-employees-FINALv3(131011).docx

BUMP...THUMP...CLUMP...STUMP! Simon's at the Bartlett's Lab all day today so please hold your 'job' calls for him til tomorrow. Cheers.. Paul

This 'FoC' workshop is running at Wythenshawe Park, south Manchester, on Tues. 14th Jan. (2104) and we are currently taking bookings. Please email my colleague Polly ([email protected]) to book a place. Thanks all n hope to see you there. Paul PS Don't forget you get to choose your own lunch too...that being whatever you pack up before you leave home (NB tea, coffee n biccies will be provided.)

Hi David, thank you for this. However, if you wish to formally register your interest as a peer reviewer, which would be great, could I trouble you to do so directly to Simon ([email protected] ). Alternatively, as part of the process, it is intended to go out to industry consultation once a draft document is produced (which has been peer reviewed as part of the process.) Hence it will come to this forum. Cheers.. Paul

Hi 'Lancstree', thanks for your interest. I have copied the document link in a post below, hopefully this helps. The reviewer criteria, I would suggest, would be someone industry based with a good knowledge of the legislation and industry good practice aspects of treework at height, ideally both as a practitioner and a manager. However it is acknowledged that both aspects may be individually provided by different people. I guess what needs to be borne in mind, at least in part, is that this document is not, for example, a review of the Guide to Good Climbing Practice, i.e. an industry technical guide (review/production of which will come later,) but a high level management document, akin to the IRATA CoP (see Industrial Rope Access Trade Association ), which will cover legislation, regulation, risk assessments, safe systems of work etc. etc. Hoping this helps but please don't hesitate to contact Simon also as he is project manager for this. Cheers.. Paul

Call for Expressions of Interest Industry Code of Practice for Tree Work at Height Authoring and Peer Review The Industry Code of Practice for Tree Work at Height (ICOP) will set out the key principles, policies, planning and control of tree work at height and will be written for those engaged in managing aerial tree work. The ICOP will provide detailed guidance on a wide range of topics including standards, legislation, competencies, equipment, inspection, access and work systems. Process The AA has now secured funding to commission the project and invites expressions of interest to tender for the authoring and/or peer reviewing of the ICOP document. Interested parties will be provided with a Framework Scoping Document which provides a more detailed description of the project requirements and will help prospective authors to tender for the work. The final stage will be to agree a contract with our preferred author and to identify a small group of technical peer reviewers. Next Steps Please forward your expression of interest only at this stage to Simon Richmond, Senior Technical Officer at [email protected] indicating your interest in either or both of the following: 1. To tender for the contract with the Arboricultural Association to produce the ICOP. 2. To offer technical advice and support for the production of the ICOP through peer review, on a paid but ad hoc basis. Expressions of interest must be received by 20 December 2013

Nope...well not yet anyway. Through previous inputs and comments from various industry based sources we have developed a list of invitees but protocol dictates we should advertise it widely as there are other people out there who are equally capable but not on our radar. Hence the post here on 'THE' industry forum. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Jamie, apologies for my delay in replying here. Thanks for your words of acknowledgement and support, much appreciated. I will keep the forum posted as things progress. Thanks again. Cheers.. Paul

Sounds like your getting closer then, I'm pretty sure it's one of the ornamental crateagus's. Cheers.. Paul PS Deffo not Hornbeam

both right, I believe...I'm getting braver