AA Teccie (Paul)

Flip David, that's quite worrying. Nev Fay recently provided some similar images ofr the AA P&D book, including a shot of the top of the branch and then the sectional view showing the extent of decay. The thing that immediately struck me was 'anchor point' selection for the unaware and the need to thoroughly load test at ground level, nay branches upto 150mm dia (is what I suggested), to ensure it was safe to use. The GGCP (Guide to Good Climbing Practice) on review maybe needs to mention this specifically as it could have serious implications. Thanks for the info, very useful as always:thumbup: Paul

Mmmm, I can understand why you say that but these schemes (n therein lies part of the problem as there are multiples of them...BUT only one ArbAC scheme:biggrin:) do highlight the importance of H&S compliance and improve awarness and, in turn, the culture within a business...where/if it needs to be of course. Obvioulsy, in turn, they also improve your compliance and help you better fill your duties under H&S law as an employer (of both PAYE staff AND none PAYE staff) which is a good thing and protects you...and hopefully makes you sleep easier at night...with an accompnaying 'hot toddy' of course.) They also present an opportuntiy perhaps to demonstarte that you are not a disreputable contractor, as they wouldn't apply...nor comply. Hence I think they do have a place in the contracting industry and, 'luv em r ate em', they're here to stay. There, r u convinced? Cheers.. paul

To be honest, in practice outside of the ArbAC scheme, I'm not sure how it actually works. With us, on approval, we issue an AA cert. of H&S compliance and the contractor presents this to SAFEcontractor instaed of their H&S documentation. They still have to pay the SAFEcon. membership fee, although this is reduced by 50% as an ArbAC, and of course complete their application form on the first occasion. Your accreditations shoud, be equally recognised under SSiP, of which both CHAS and SAFEcontractor are member organisations...as hopefully ArbAC will be very shortly. Cheers.. Paul PS I hope I've answered your query but not convinced

You're welcomed Pete...I'll expect your ArbAC application in due course then Cheers..

Hi Robert, Nope, in theory, and in practice, as they both assess Stage1 H&S, i.e. basic documentary compliance, and are both members of SSiP (Safety Scheme in Procurement.) this means they've agreed mutual recognition so you can apply for SAFEcontractor as an existing CHAS acccredited contractor, provided you've got a min. 9 months validity left, without a further document submission. You do need to pay the SAFEcontractor memberhsip fee though. Alternatively, you could consider ARB Approved which includes CHAS and gives access to SAFEcontractor with a 50% discount on membership fees...and is your industry scheme, and assessese Stage2, 'on-site', and includes so much more! Shout if you wanna know more. Cheers.. Paul

Sorry for the short notice here folks See AA Approved Contractor Preparation Workshop ? Training for further details. Hope to see you there. Cheers.. Paul PS The £50 attendance fee is refunded on application for assessment.

Hi David, to add my ten penneth.. Whilst delivering the Basic Tree Surevy Course I explain about the 'nylon mallet' as a basic sounding device to detect decay / dysfunction but suggest it should be used in a targeted manner, rather than just randomnly 'knocking around', as it could still cause injury to lightly barked trees. That said I do acknowledge that not all examples of decay / dysfucntion exhibit visual signs. Not sure what the guys in the vid were trying to establish, other than obvioulsy decay of course, but was that part of a safety inspection or pre-climb...wudda liked to have seen the ladders secured too...once a H&S nurdy always... I have used the boot technique before too, but raised too many clients eyebrows so bought myself a mallet...much more impressive. Hope you're well. Cheers.. Paul

Gibbon, whilst not "re-inventing the wheel", so to speak, I would strongly recommend you have a stab yourself first, if only to identify the 'significant' hazards so the process becomes more of a 'compare and contrast'. The danger with simply adopting someone elses (inc. the AA's, but we don't actually have one for air-spading currently...so please share with me ) is that you don't actually satisfy yourself it is 'suitable and sufficient' (the HSE test for RA) and meet your duties under the Act. Cheers.. Paul

Hmmm , You know exactly what you're doing Mr Wilkinson, despite the claim to guess, but, in all honesty, it is down to training, experience and knowledge = COMPETENCE Take care out there.. Paul

Pedantic is sometimes good To quote 'OUR' industry standard, which is a guide of course: "...it should preferably start soon after the tree has become established and is between 25mm to 50mm in diameter at the selected height of pollarding (often 2m to 3m)." Further, it goes on to state: "If the stem has attained a diameter of more than 50mm, but less than about 200mm at 2m to 3m height, pollarding may still be initiated." (It then say about ideally retaining some existing branches if it's this size.) So, do you pollard...or do you 'top', with a veiw to then pollarding/re-pollarding at a later date? I'm not saying you shouldn't do this but what I am saying is we should be aware how our industry standard explains pollarding and, ideally, use the correct terminology with the customer. Too often indiscriminate and damaging (extensive) 'topping' is described as pollarding to make it more acceptable to the client and easier to sell. Just my thoughts.. Cheers Paul

SWL is sometimes displayed on hardwear items, and certainly on machinery, but usually ropes etc. refer back to the manufacturers / suppliers info and the LOLER record of through examination. I'm no LOLER expert, in fact no expert anywhere , and hence I did find this link useful / interesting. Rigging & Hoisting Cheers.. paul

Hi Paul, hope you're well. In my previous life as a TPO Officer we used to identify potential development land within the district through the Local Pla process. This alos inclued TPO'ing signifciant amenity trees and, overall worked quite well. The LPA was very restrictive in it's approach, i.e. TPOing ONLY the most importnat trees, but then not willing to negotiate removals unless very exceptiional circumsatnces. The areas you describe above are usually, in my expreince, dedicated Conservation Areas anyway so trees will be outline protected. Cheers.. Paul PS I do agree with a later post that fore-armed is fore-warned and if stuff is 'on-line' so it's a quick galnce beforehand, fine.

Hi Paul, hope you're well. Not so sure it was immaterial given the partciulars of the case, so to speak, but I do take your point that anyone can enquire. Nonetheless, as a professional, I still think it's best to be open and transparent (within reason of course ) and disclose your intentions to the tree owner...even if you smell a rat. Regarding TO relationships I absolutley agree you need to keep them onside, so to speak, BUT I come across many instances where I feel contractors are perhaps doing a dis-service to their clients by not pushing TOs for TPO decisions after 8 weeks (it's not unusual for me to hear of anything upto 3 months and a contractor very unwilling to push...to be fair, often because they're not aware you can appeal for none determination after 8 weeks...not to be made a habit of BUT.) Cheers.. Paul

Related, we had a previous formal complaint made against an ArbAC who had, inadvertently, alerted the LPA to the possible loss of a large mature beech in a side garden (turned out the land owner wanted the tree removed to develop the land.) The grounds for the complaint was that because the landowner hadn't instructed the contractor, he had no reason / grounds to enquire about the TPO and thereby alert the LPA to place one on the tree. We defended the contractor saying it was 'custom and practice' to do a TPO etc. check and that he could be prosecuted if he proceeded without such. The complainant challenged this saying there was no contract and the contractor acted outside of his remit and wasn't instructed to do 'the checks' (obvioulsy he was aggreived as he now had to negotiate a TPO prior to a plannning application which he didn't have previoulsy.) We again cited the 'custom and practice' and professional duty BUT, throughout, I felt uneasy to be honest and I'm sure if he pushed hard, whihc thankfully he didn't, we would have had to agree teh contractor acted outside of his remit. Hence, we have now issued a directive to all ArbACs saying whenever you intend to check for TPO's etc. you should inform the client beforehand (not that you need toi disclose the possible outcome of such, i.e. TPO placement BUT out of professional duty / courtesy you should inform them.) Something of a conundrum me thinks. Cheers all.. Paul

The 'inaugural event' today at Taunton, and the first of many...I'm sure it will be going well. THANK YOU to everyone as we've been inundated with bookings and Tiff is working her 'proverbial' off, inc. coming in over the Easter weekend, to get them processed and confirmations issued. So please bear with us if you've sent in a booking form but not yet heard back, we'll be with you shortly. TTFN.. Paul

..AND to be aware of the full range options available to them....inc. cranes of course (but not for smaller trees admittedly.) Cheers Pete, and I know exactly where you're coming from. Paul

MEWPs....at least in the worse case scenario, or can you fell it without the need to climb, or can it just be left as a nature stick to break up naturally. Consider the 'other' options first and climb only as a last resort and modify / adapt your working methods as others have said AND, absolutely avoid climbing and rigging dead trees wherever possible, but again if not modify as others have said before. ALSO, sorry, no actually I'm not, it's different if you're prepared to put yourself in a situation as the business proprietor / sole trader etc. BUT it's quite, quite different if it's your employees / instructed 'sub-contractors' AND, in the unlikely event of..., HSE just love hindsight..."the tree was obvioulsy dead and you put a climber in there" etc. etc. PLEASE think very carefully beforehand. Take care out there.. Cheers, Paul

Hi Henri, Have a look at p.5 of the ArbAC standards to see what we would be looking for...in most circumstances (AND copy documents rather than originals as mentioned later.) Hope this helps.. Paul SchemeStandardsUpto5-121113 (1).docx

Darragh, you could consider joining the AA and accessing the Irish Branch for specific information (see Ireland - IR Branch - - Arboricultural Association ) In my, very limited, experience, much of the H&S legislation is based on EU Directives which 'broadly' aligns with UK Regulations...kinda! (Obvioulsy this relates to ROI, NI is very similar to the UK.) Regards.. Paul

Sal, if you can email me directly, [email protected], with your name and venue / date etc. I'll look into it tomorrow and get back to you. Sorry you've had to chase but I know Tiff's been inundated with bookings, which is good but inevitably results in delays. Thanks.. Paul

James, I'm happy to stand by my reply that holders of CS39 + MEWP ticket don't require CS47 as the correct answer. Cheers.. Paul

ME...well, as far as I'm concerned of course Joking apart, I'm pretty sure this is the case as it's a question we've raised before with HSE. The thing about the CS39 is that you now understand the implications of compression and tension wood/branches on aerial sections of the crown...and of course the skills required to use a top-handled saw. Those skills are equally applicable beit from rope n harness or MEWP. The guy using the ground saw only won;t understand this and hence if this wish to prune from a MEWP they need to do CS47. Is 'Mr Graham' around or still digging himself out from deepest darkest, or rather snowiest, N. Yorks to offer an opinion??? (cheers Iain.) Cheers.. Paul PS Was he/she aware you had a MEWP 'ticket' as that's maybe the confusion?