Call to regulation pros/cons...

Birdyman88

Well-Known Member
It is not some arbitrary person or committee sitting on a pedestal playing CA god
I know, it says where the numbers come from right above the numbers in the CA application guide that I cut and pasted from. And you actually just made a good point, and that is that CA's see their work as being biased more toward the biological sciences and risk assessment role. But, now I have to ask then, where are the all the check boxes for the demolition team, and where is their questionaire? Maybe the point is that we shouldn't be expecting the CA's to be the experts on that subject, yet places like Casper and states with licensing requirements keep looking at the CA for an answer.
 

oldoakman

Well-Known Member
I know, it says where the numbers come from right above the numbers in the CA application guide that I cut and pasted from. And you actually just made a good point, and that is that CA's see their work as being biased more toward the biological sciences and risk assessment role. But, now I have to ask then, where are the all the check boxes for the demolition team, and where is their questionaire? Maybe the point is that we shouldn't be expecting the CA's to be the experts on that subject, yet places like Casper and states with licensing requirements keep looking at the CA for an answer.
They keep looking to the CA's because who else can they look to? Extension Agent? perhaps, but many of them are CA's as well. Some time back I was at some seminar or conference or something like that (not tree related) and the speaker gave an example as to why a finish carpenter got 3X $$ per hour where the demolition workers got only X $$ per hour and the answer was the carpenters work required 3 times the skill. Same thing here.
 

Birdyman88

Well-Known Member
But why would you ask the finish carpenter to determine the safest way to tear the building down? But if there is no credentialed demolition expert, then I guess the finish carpenter is the only credentialed expert to ask. Who gets paid what is another topic.

It just sounds like there's some general skepticism to ISA having a credentialing process for the people doing or overseeing the wood removal? They have one for the climbers. They even have training on those topics. So, in lieu of just send a CA out to the site and all is well? I don't doubt that most CA's are highly knowledgeable in those skills, but I believe there are some who aren't, and the ISA CA credentialling might fail to reveal them. I still don't believe cutting grass has very much to do with overseeing a removal operation.
 
Last edited:

ATH

Well-Known Member
ATH asked if there was an epidemic,trees dying from bad prunning ( i’m paraphrasing they were not his exact words) In south Jersey I believe there absolutely is.The general health of our red oaks sucks,its been declining for years,it is our state tree and we have some beautiful giants, alot of them are already stuggling,it doesnt take much to send one into a tailspin,a few ill advised cuts and there goes another gigantic beauty.Of coarse the guy responsible is long gone by time tree becomes stresed and dangerous,many times nieve homeowner calls him back and pays to have it remove,neither one of them put 2&2 together.
My question whether PEOPLE are dying as a result of bad tree care practices. If not then I don't see the need for regulatory authorities to be involved.
 

Chaplain242

Well-Known Member
ATH asked if there was an epidemic,trees dying from bad prunning ( i’m paraphrasing they were not his exact words) In south Jersey I believe there absolutely is.The general health of our red oaks sucks,its been declining for years,it is our state tree and we have some beautiful giants, alot of them are already stuggling,it doesnt take much to send one into a tailspin,a few ill advised cuts and there goes another gigantic beauty.Of coarse the guy responsible is long gone by time tree becomes stresed and dangerous,many times nieve homeowner calls him back and pays to have it remove,neither one of them put 2&2 together.
I have seen in some areas a tree register for historical trees/iconic trees which require a permit to do anything to them, even if on private property.

I believe the permit costs between $500 and $1k. The fine for pruning can range from $5k to much higher if I permitted removal. A qualified pruned would be required. Prices for pruning would be pushed up, but that further mitigate pruning/removal.

Is a PIA for the HO or site owner when they want to mitigate a problem, or develop the site. However it works very effectively in controlling bad pruning, or wanton removal.
 

Chaplain242

Well-Known Member
They keep looking to the CA's because who else can they look to? Extension Agent? perhaps, but many of them are CA's as well. Some time back I was at some seminar or conference or something like that (not tree related) and the speaker gave an example as to why a finish carpenter got 3X $$ per hour where the demolition workers got only X $$ per hour and the answer was the carpenters work required 3 times the skill. Same thing here.
3x skill or 3x harder to find/get?
 

Chaplain242

Well-Known Member
But why would you ask the finish carpenter to determine the safest way to tear the building down? But if there is no credentialed demolition expert, then I guess the finish carpenter is the only credentialed expert to ask. Who gets paid what is another topic.

It just sounds like there's some general skepticism to ISA having a credentialing process for the people doing or overseeing the wood removal? They have one for the climbers. They even have training on those topics. So, in lieu of just send a CA out to the site and all is well? I don't doubt that most CA's are highly knowledgeable in those skills, but I believe there are some who aren't, and the ISA CA credentialling might fail to reveal them. I still don't believe cutting grass has very much to do with overseeing a removal operation.
Indeed tell me where you do a complete training course on tree removal that qualifies the attendee to do every tree they come across?

Yes can train in skills and appraisal, but that doesn’t ‘qualify’ to do the work.

It is often putting ones experiences together to form proficiency that gets the job done.
 

Chaplain242

Well-Known Member
Another issue I have heard about is the competency framework model of training. This is where courses are structured to determine if one is competent, or not competent.

It sounds good, but with the level of training an attendee gets it has been argued that it is arrogant in the extreme to determine an attendee is ‘competent’ because of one/few simple exercises on a course.

If that is where the certification goes I think the whole idea is in trouble.
 

Wrangler

Member
My question whether PEOPLE are dying as a result of bad tree care practices. If not then I don't see the need for regulatory authorities to be involved.
Sorry,i should have went back and reread post before i carelessly quoted you!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATH

Birdyman88

Well-Known Member
Indeed tell me where you do a complete training course on tree removal that qualifies the attendee to do every tree they come across?
You don't. The only solution is to ensure the person(s) responsible for overseeing wood removal is trained in some physical science and materials theory along with the accepted practices, so that they can figure out a safe solution. IF a city/state wants to regulate, then they should spend some extra time looking there. Since ISA continues to be referenced by the authorities, why cant they offer a voluntary credential that would meet that regulatory aspect that would satisfy say something like NJs LTCO category. Right now, NJ says you need CA to meet LTCO. There seems to be a conflict in what ISA says CA is capable of, and what NJ say CA is capable of. Is it because ISA has no broad tree work credential below CA? I don't know. But back on point, that area can be and is a weak spot that has pretty devastating consequences. But the regulating needs to solve the actual problem at hand, otherwise it's not needed.
 

ATH

Well-Known Member
Sorry,i should have went back and reread post before i carelessly quoted you!
No worries!

I can see people thinking that killing too many trees is a reason to introduce regulation. If a lot of large/historic trees were being destroyed, it is probably worth discussion. I like the "balance" that @Chaplain242 mentioned where some historic trees are protected, but not every. Sounds like they just need to make that process much more efficient and know who to trust with their care.
 

ATH

Well-Known Member
You don't. The only solution is to ensure the person(s) responsible for overseeing wood removal is trained in some physical science and materials theory along with the accepted practices, so that they can figure out a safe solution. IF a city/state wants to regulate, then they should spend some extra time looking there. Since ISA continues to be referenced by the authorities, why cant they offer a voluntary credential that would meet that regulatory aspect that would satisfy say something like NJs LTCO category. Right now, NJ says you need CA to meet LTCO. There seems to be a conflict in what ISA says CA is capable of, and what NJ say CA is capable of. Is it because ISA has no broad tree work credential below CA? I don't know. But back on point, that area can be and is a weak spot that has pretty devastating consequences. But the regulating needs to solve the actual problem at hand, otherwise it's not needed.
Might TCIA's CTSP be a better fit in some circumstances?

I get the impression that ISA and TCIA look to not step on each other's toes where ISA does more of the science/biology while TCIA does more of the safety. I'm a member of both organizations and think both are great at what they do.
 

Birdyman88

Well-Known Member
@rico shared this in another thread. Okay, so this guy is a YouTube arb star, ISA certified, and I'm sure he has all the proper licensing and insurance. Watch this and see how many stupid mistakes are being made throughout this process. In particular, note that there are customers in the work zone when felling - both during the cuts and immediately after the tree lands - and also note that there are people in the zone without ppe. Watch that guy in the red shirt walk up to the tree right after it lands, and that lady hanging out without a hard hat during the cuts.

 

Chaplain242

Well-Known Member
@rico shared this in another thread. Okay, so this guy is a YouTube arb star, ISA certified, and I'm sure he has all the proper licensing and insurance. Watch this and see how many stupid mistakes are being made throughout this process. In particular, note that there are customers in the work zone when felling - both during the cuts and immediately after the tree lands - and also note that there are people in the zone without ppe. Watch that guy in the red shirt walk up to the tree right after it lands, and that lady hanging out without a hard hat during the cuts.

Shows just how easy it is to drop vigilance and possibly end up in a Casper situation....

If that top got stuck on the bar as it went over it might have been an interesting experience for him, not to mention possibly pulling top away from intended lay - not taking that extra step up before back cutting made it so much harder and more hazardous...
 

Birdyman88

Well-Known Member
I JUST SAW THIS

I just saw a tree company at work in my neighborhood an hour or so ago. This company has been in business for 41 years, and according to their truck, they are license and insured. They have very high Google, Angies List, and Yelp reviews. I do not believe that any of them are ISA certified. So here’s what I saw. 5 crew members on the job without any PPE; i.e. hard hat, safety colored clothing, safety glasses, or chainsaw protection. I know that one of the ground workers was wearing sneakers, and another one was wearing shorts. They were using a bucket truck and a mini skid steer as well as a chipper. When I got there, they were making the notch cut on a 20 ft tall, straight, and non-leaning trunk section of a sweetgum that had what appeared to be 28” base diameter. The customer(s) were on the back patio about 25-30 ft away from the tree, opposite the fall direction, not wearing any PPE. The notch cut, while clean and straight, did not any relieveing cut on the sides, and the bottom of the notch was angled noticeably upward. They attached the pull line, a solid blue rope which was probably a ½” or 5/8” double braid bull rope, to the mini skid steer. When the skid steer driver put the initial pull on the tree, the top of the section exhibited a noticeable movement or flex. The chainsaw operator made his felling cut about 4-6” above the hing, without the use of any wedges. The tree came down on the intended path, and the butt landed about 4-5 ft away from the stump. I wonder how much force was on that pull line to cause those actions? 10%, 20%, 50% of the minimum break strength? I’m sure no one can answer that. Had the pull line broken, well, you know. With 41 years in business, there is not any state, or even ISA, that would not have let the owner, or any crew member with 3 year’s experience, take a certification test or apply for a license to do tree work.
 

rico

Well-Known Member
@rico shared this in another thread. Okay, so this guy is a YouTube arb star, ISA certified, and I'm sure he has all the proper licensing and insurance. Watch this and see how many stupid mistakes are being made throughout this process. In particular, note that there are customers in the work zone when felling - both during the cuts and immediately after the tree lands - and also note that there are people in the zone without ppe. Watch that guy in the red shirt walk up to the tree right after it lands, and that lady hanging out without a hard hat during the cuts.

We wont talk about the gawd awful cutting? Dudes a hack, plus he hurt my feelings when he told me to piss off on youtube>
 
Top