Is it necessary to be certified to be a quality tr

Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure the old folks from New Jersey got things started back in '38. Anybody out their that has any history about the Jersey folks and their early certification Program ?


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not that old, but:
grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Since 1941, and after the passing of the Certified Tree Expert Bill in 1940, The Society of Certified Tree Experts was established. Fifteen men were the first to pass the exam administered by the New Jersey Department of Conservation and Development and it was those men who on the eve of July 23, 1941 marked the inception of the organization. This group is the conduit to the public through advertising , meetings, sponsorships, Community functions and consumer mediation. SCTE members include nearly 50 professionals and is growing each year as our services to the members and public increase.

These professionals are dedicated to the advancement of arboriculture and tree care professionalism through continuing education, public awareness and community service


[/ QUOTE ]

That was taken from Their Website
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

Being certified do not make you smarter, but it show that you have tried to fulfill your potential. You´ve got a certification showing that other people agree with you whaen you claim to be a great arborist.
As for climbing - there is an ongoing discussion in my country whether the people workin with a more theorethical approach to treecare should be called arboriculturalists and the practical lot should be called arborists. There is also an issue over that the cert. arb. certification can be swopped to an ETW certification and vice versa by simply paying the exam fee. The thing is that the ETW certification is like a cert.arb. with practical climbing. Anyway the recentment towards education among some of the participants of this thread is a bit disturbing, it really doesn´t matter how fast you´re reaching a certain point in the tree if you don´t know what to do when you´re there.
crazy.gif

Cheers mates
Svein
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

I sometimes equate being a certified arborist to becoming a black belt in TKD.

Becoming a black belt is only the beginning of a martial artists training. It signifies that the person has a good grasp of basic techniques. The level of martial artist you become afterward is entirely up to you. But it's only a starting point.

Same with the CA. It's only the beginning of an arborists education in my opionion.
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

[ QUOTE ]
I sometimes equate being a certified arborist to becoming a black belt in TKD.

Becoming a black belt is only the beginning of a martial artists training. It signifies that the person has a good grasp of basic techniques. The level of martial artist you become afterward is entirely up to you. But it's only a starting point.

Same with the CA. It's only the beginning of an arborists education in my opionion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like that.
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

I have two points I would like to discuss. The first is the word "arborist" and how the meaning has changed substantially during my time as a tree worker. When I first started work, we called ourselves Arborists. Primarily to distinquish ourselves from loggers; i.e., residential vs forest work.

I believe that that is no longer the definition of an arborist. The arborist of today is much more and I think this is the basis of a lot of resentment I see here against certification. Is the sticking point on the definition: What is an arborist?

Having sat with my wife through her training and studying for her certification I found it incredibly interesting. It reminded me that just because I had been in the tree business for a long time, that there is still a lot to learn.

And for those of you who can't deal with the change, whether it be in the definition of a word or a type of saddle or climbing technique, remember that Life is Change. And when you have reached your limit of being able to adapt or assimilate those changes, you have reached your limit in life.

The second point is our expectation of certification to fix a multitude of problems. Say we have a fully certified CA that is also a great climber. Is this person going to then be a great tree company? Will that person have the skills to converse with people, set schedules, show up on time, present well, all the multitude of things that make a reliable and quality company that people will want to hire on a repetitive basis.

Realistically certification can't address those things, so you still have someone placed out in the field who may or may not be a shining example of the tree industry. And nay-sayers will jump on that and say "see, certification doesn't work". I can hold myself up as an example. Anything that has anything to do with trees I can do. But I am not enough for a full company. It requires the people handling skills, bookkeeping and scheduling that my wife provides to say nothing of a good ground crew. Separate we would fail (or certainly not shine). Together we create a company that has established itself with a reputation refined enough that when customers call and are told that there is a three to six month waiting period and they might want to find someone sooner, they say no problem we can wait. There are a lot of intangibles that go into creating a good tree company. Certification is a part of that. Like photosynthesis is part of what a tree does.

Dave
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

That covers it well Dave - very well written.

I agree whole heartedly. There is so much to learn on many levels.

Thats the beauty of treework - its a perpetual apprenticeship of life through the medium of trees.
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

around here
CA's don't top trees, everyone else does
CA's operate above board, with all insurances, there is only one non-CA company that does.

price is the driving factor for the majority of people, but there are enough folks willing to pay just a little more for the CA
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

Thanks Mark

I knew someone, even someone as young as you, would have the correct information on hand.

I attached the first attempt by the folks back in 1931 to pass a state assembly bill to regulate the practice of Arboriculture.
 

Attachments

  • 130727-Assemblybill239.webp
    130727-Assemblybill239.webp
    309.8 KB · Views: 57
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

1) Is it necessary to be certified to be a quality tree care professional?
NO BUT IT SURE HELPS

2) Does being a certified arborist make you any smarter then a non-certified arborist?
PROBABLY cuz you had to study and learn to pass the test

3) Is taking a test of one's knowledge make one more knowledgeable then someone who doesn't take the exam?

YES; THE ONES WHO SAY THEY KNOW BUT DON'T BOTHER WITH THE TEST ARE OFTEN BS'ING

4) Why did you get certified as an arborist?
TO IMPROVE

5) Does getting certified separate you from the non-certified competition?
MILES AWAY WITH BCMA, AND BOY DOES IT PAY!

6) Is being certified as an arborist overplayed?
SOMETIMES, but more often it is underplayed by those who have not made the effort.

7) Is the expense of arborist certification worth the investment?
BOY DOES IT PAY!

8) When was the last time you had to produce your certification number?
I GET CHECKED OUT ON THE ISA SITE ALL THE TIME

9) Is certification just a one time testing of a persons knowledge?
NO--CEU'S

10) Is the requirement to optain continuing education units keeping certification valid in the eyes of the consumer?
YES

11) Can you read and learn from others enough information to be a qualified as a tree care professional, as opposed to taking an exam?
NO; IF YOU CAN'T DEMONSTRATE THE KNOWLEDGE YOU CANNOT CREDIBLY CLAIM IT

12) Is the person who waits in the hallway to sign up for CEU'S they actually degrading (diluting) the profession?
HELL YES THROW THE BUMS OUT or better yet take pics of them and post em on treebuzz!

13) The question is it really working?
YES BUT IT COULD WORK A LOT BETTER

14) Should we be testing at regional meetings that provide CEU's? NOT A BAD IDEA.

Hey Chip you met a BCMA who never climbed? If so, what is the big deal? I know a lot of BCMA's who climb/ed. That is excellent experience but not a deal-breaker.

I've been CA for 17 years and it was a great springboard.
santa.gif
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

Thanks for taking the time to answer the questions. It has helped me to gather info so as to defend a gentleman that is facing arbitration regarding his creditability as an arborist. This person has been working with trees since 1965 and at one time became certified as a tree worker.( not at present)
The neighbor is claiming that because he is not a ISA certified arborist that he should not be allowed to work on any trees any where in the the town. Absurd if you ask me.

I've known this individual for over thirty years and can vouch for his quality of workmanship as nothing but exceptional. Basiclly he taught me a good deal of what I know today. Yes I took the arborist exam several years back but he did not. That was his choice, but it in know way diminishes his talent and ability to get the job done equally as well as myself even thou he is not a certified arborist.
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

you know, if someone doesn't have the CA
but has the desire to do better, work to the best of his abilities, and the experience and knowledge, he'd be good in my book
as an aside, I know a CA who is 22, took the test at 19.
I believe one of the requirements is "to have a minimum of three years of fulltime experience in arboriculture."
well that means at the ages of 16, 17 and 18, while he was in High School and College he also worked fulltime in arboriculture? He also is one to show up at the end of the day to sign the CEU sheet (my first hand knowledge)
I think your buddy is worth a heck of alot more than him
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

[ QUOTE ]

The neighbor is claiming that because he is not a ISA certified arborist that he should not be allowed to work on any trees any where in the the town. Absurd if you ask me.

[/ QUOTE ]Without CA it is a lot harder to prove competence, but of course it can be done. It's kind of like a college degree--when I testify against university professors, the opposing attorney always likes to pick through my cv and say where is the sheepskin you ninny? If I did not have a lot of other stuff in the cv I could not be considered qualified to testify.

The cert folks are working hard to make the test about tree skills and not word skills or test skills. I encourage your friend to give it a shot. The pressure from towns to have a CA on jobs is only going to increase.
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The neighbor is claiming that because he is not a ISA certified arborist that he should not be allowed to work on any trees any where in the the town. Absurd if you ask me.

[/ QUOTE ]Without CA it is a lot harder to prove competence, but of course it can be done. The pressure from towns to have a CA on jobs is only going to increase.

[/ QUOTE ]

I gave certification a long, hard look before committing to and pursuing it. I believed it was "the way of the future". But we are older and I wasn't convinced it would be "worth it" for us. It has proved very valuable indeed. However, I took the test; not David. And yet David is the one you would want trimming or removing your tree. I have the field experience but not at his level.

When speaking to the City Council last fall encouraging them to set up a tree ordinance one of the questions asked of me was whether I would recommend that any tree service working within the city limits be required to have a Cert. Arb. on staff. And I told them, no; not at this time. There aren't enough of us here in this area yet and it would potentially eliminate some very good workers. This, of course, is definitely in an area with a lot smaller population.

I do believe it is a worthwhile endeavor. I have been interested in the comments on other threads from some that claimed the test was so easy as to be meaningless and yet many who made those statements didn't pass the test with the ease they thought they would (or had to retake it) or haven't even tried to take it.

David feels he would be unable to pass the test. I feel differently but it is not up to me to insist on something that would not improve his performance.

Your friend, Sohner, has his reputation to back him with examples of his work as clear evidence. These are his CV and should still be able to stand up to the "University professors" with their sheepskins.

Good luck.

Sylvia
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

I just had a run in with a certified arborist the other day, which I feel pertains to this discussion.

One town in which I work has a tree warden. This tree warden also owns a tree company which does work within AND FOR the town, along with private customers. One of my customers borders a customer of the tree warden. The neighboring property has a dead hickory on it which presents a hazard to my customer's home. As a professional courtesy, I called the tree warden and informed him of the problem, as his client says the tree is healthy and safe. The tree warden says that... THE WHITE OAK IS ALIVE. Nothing about safe, and nothing about healthy. The tree warden asked me for my license number... to which I replied that I am taking the test on Wednesday. Now I'm sorry, but if you're a licensed arborist, and the town tree warden... you should EASILY be able to diagnose a hazard tree.

I hope that this little shpiel here has made a point.
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

[ QUOTE ]
The neighboring property has a dead hickory on it...his client says the tree is healthy and safe. The tree warden says that... THE WHITE OAK IS ALIVE...if you're a licensed arborist, and the town tree warden... you should EASILY be able to diagnose a hazard tree.

[/ QUOTE ]hl, diagnosing (or even defining)"hazard" trees is seldom easy, no matter how long you've done it. If you are calling a tree "dead" that is not dead, look again. Are you sure you are all looking at the same tree? HOw about posting a picture? As for the ethics of a warden doing private work, that is a separate post.
 
[ QUOTE ]
1) Is it necessary to be certified to be a quality tree care professional?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes



[ QUOTE ]

2) Does being a certified arborist make you any smarter then a non-certified arborist?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, in most cases.



[ QUOTE ]

3) Is taking a test of one's knowledge make one more knowledgeable then someone who doesn't take the exam?

[/ QUOTE ]

It could if you act on the results



[ QUOTE ]

4) Why did you get certified as an arborist?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I find trees interesting and wanted to learn more about them and make more money.




[ QUOTE ]

5) Does getting certified separate you from the non-certified competition?

[/ QUOTE ]

In my mind Yes, in reality No



[ QUOTE ]

6) Is being certified as an arborist overplayed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not round here it isn't




[ QUOTE ]

7) Is the expense of arborist certification worth the investment?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes



[ QUOTE ]

8) When was the last time you had to produce your certification number?

[/ QUOTE ]

Never



[ QUOTE ]

9) Is certification just a one time testing of a persons knowledge?

[/ QUOTE ]

No




[ QUOTE ]

10) Is the requirement to optain continuing education units keeping certification valid in the eyes of the consumer?

[/ QUOTE ]

The consumer does not know about that and doesn't care, I do though.



[ QUOTE ]

11) Can you read and learn from others enough information to be a qualified as a tree care professional, as opposed to taking an exam?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes



[ QUOTE ]

12) Is the person who waits in the hallway to sign up for CEU'S helping this profession to advance or are they actually degrading (diluting) the profession?

[/ QUOTE ]

They are following the process as laid out by the ISA, they dont degrade it if they are genuinly interested in keeping the depth of knowledge deep.



[ QUOTE ]

I'm trying to make some sense out of program that is totally optional but is often made mandatory by certain city officals. Many city's have incorporated the requirement to be certified hoping it will curb the ruination to their trees.

13) The question is it really working?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its probably working a damn sight better than it would if there were no Certified Arborists.




[ QUOTE ]
I am WCISA certified and have been for 22 years. I'm not so much against it but just trying to find out what some of the others who are, what their feelings are on certain matters.

14) Should we be testing at regional meetings that provide CEU's?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes
 
Re: Is it necessary to be certified to be a qualit

GUYMAYOR- You're right and I deleted my post. That was not very kind of me. When I first read the post I replied to, it did not set well with me, and felt the person’s reply was a little mocking of the CA credential. Reading your reply this morning, and after a night of sleep has help me to see more clearly on how to give my input.

As a basic answer to the original question, certification is important. One of the problems-MAJOR PROBLEMS, is the ability for anyone with a chain saw to be able to operate in the tree care industry regardless of their credentials, experience, or qualifications. This is not true for every state, but it is true in my state and the surrounding states. I think our industry has reached a point in its development that we need to have stricter standards and requirements for individuals to operate as a tree care provider. We have as an industry excellent organizations such as the ISA, TCIA, ASCA, and others that are working hard on our behalf to raise the level of professionalism. These organizations have developed terrific safety and training programs to help all of us to be more professional, competent, and safer as an industry. Those who do not avail themselves to the resources that are available are only hurting themselves, and worse, the industry as a whole.

As long we as an industry allow individuals and companies that have not reached some level of training and legal legitimacy, our industry will, and is presently having a hard time raising above the lowest level of “professionalism”. I personally would be in favor of state licensing requiring some sort of certification in all 50 States for anyone providing tree care services.

What would this accomplish:
1.This would raise the level of professionalism in our industry that so many of us are working to accomplish.
2.It would raise the quality of workmanship as a whole.
3.We would be viewed as a professional industry (such as plumbers and electricians) in the eyes of the public.
4.Our industry would be safer with fewer accidents and fatalities because the standards that have already been established (ANSI, OSHA, etc.) could be more easily monitored and policed from the authorities and from us as an industry.
5.It would level the playing ground because all tree care providers would be operating on the same level of legitimacy.
6.It would allow the pricing for our services to be based on a level playing ground.

As long we as an industry allow tree care providers to continue without proper licensing, insurance, workman’s compensation, and training we will always be fighting an uphill battle from being reduced to the lowest common denominator. This also holds true for legitimate companies that will allow their employees to “moonlight” without the proper legal qualifications.

These issues are hurting our industry and the profession that I so dearly love, and am proud to be a part of.
 
1) Is it necessary to be certified to be a quality tree care professional?

Not necessarily. It is necessary to have proper training and knowledge, and this training and knowledge should lead one to be certified. Certification is simply a standard to indicate a person’s efforts to learn and be tested, but does not guarantee quality workmanship.

2) Does being a certified arborist make you any smarter then a non-certified arborist?

No. But if an arborist is intelligent enough to pass the exam, it only makes sense to become certified to indicate your level of accomplishment and commitment to the industry.

3) Is taking a test of one's knowledge make one more knowledgeable then someone who doesn't take the exam?

No. The certification is not meant to make a division between one arborist and another, in that one arborist is knowledgeable and another arborist is ignorant. You do need to be knowledgeable about trees and tree care practices to pass the exam. The certification is simply an indication you have this basic knowledge. I’m sure there are others that have this basic knowledge that have not taken or passed the exam for whatever reason.

4) Why did you get certified as an arborist?

1. To make myself more professional.
2. To separate myself from those who are not certified, and to promote the professionalism of our industry.
3. To make more money by making myself more valuable through knowledge.
4. So that I could understand why I do what I do (the science behind caring for trees).

To be a really good arborist one should have a basic understanding of all the natural sciences. All natural sciences are connected with each other in one way or another. There is no system that is isolated from the rest. There is a difference of doing what you do, and knowing why you do what you do.

5) Does getting certified separate you from the non-certified competition?

Absolutely! But I believe there is a problem with the certified arborist credential. If you are a carabineer salesman for an arborist supply house, and have been there for the required amount of time to be certified, you may. If you are a secretary or a wife of an arborist for the required amount of time, you can become a certified arborist. You do not have to have any practical experience in the field, you do not have to have the practical experience to prune, remove, or care for trees to become certified. I understand there are other people in the field of tree care that does not require them to be involved in production such as a municipal arborist. I think we need to move towards the title of “qualified arborist” for particular services and not just certified. But the “qualified arborist” should have the basic qualification of certification.

6) Is being certified as an arborist overplayed?

I don’t think so except for the examples mentioned above.

7) Is the expense of arborist certification worth the investment?

The small monetary expense is easily recovered with certification. I have invested thousands and thousands of dollars into my education over my 23 year career from our industry organizations. I’ve flown to California and Maine and many places between to avail myself to more knowledge. It has and will continue to return to me many times over.

8) When was the last time you had to produce your certification number?

I use it in reports, letters, correspondence all the time. My certification has been verified many times for expert witness and contractual reasons.

9) Is certification just a one time testing of a persons knowledge?

The certified arborist credential should be just the starting point of a life-long study of trees, plants, and the natural sciences. The more I know, the more I realize what I don’t know. The more I study and read, the larger my world becomes. There are those who don’t know what they don’t know. This can be termed as ignorance.

10) Is the requirement to obtain continuing education units keeping certification valid in the eyes of the consumer?

Not necessarily. But it does keep it valid in the eyes of the industry and to those who want to continue their education.

11) Can you read and learn from others enough information to be a qualified as a tree care professional, as opposed to taking an exam?

Absolutely. I personally have trained some very good practitioners who did not to test to become certified. I have know many non-certified arborists who were better at what they did that the certified arborist. Remember, the certification does not guarantee quality or competency. My secretaries or wife can become certified arborists if they wanted to. I would hate to put either one of them in a tree!

12) Is the person who waits in the hallway to sign up for CEU'S helping this profession to advance or are they actually degrading (diluting) the profession?

It is unethical and dishonest. But those few who do this does not hurt the certification as a whole. It only serves to expose their character.

I'm trying to make some sense out of program that is totally optional but is often made mandatory by certain city officals. Many city's have incorporated the requirement to be certified hoping it will curb the ruination to their trees.

I understand. This is the only tool at their disposal at this time to separate professionals from the hackers. We need standards and better yet…REGULATORY LAWS to remove the illegitimate tree care provider from the market place. This might not be popular, but until we regulate tree care we will always have the “ball and chain” of the pickup truck and chain saw guy around our necks!

13) The question is it really working?

Yes, but more needs to be done.
I am WCISA certified and have been for 22 years. I'm not so much against it but just trying to find out what some of the others who are, what their feelings are on certain matters.

14) Should we be testing at regional meetings that provide CEU's?

Any means of imparting knowledge and standards is a good thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom