State License for Tree Workers?

We should not forget that in law-speak the definition of "license" is "permission granted to do something that would otherwise be illegal". In order for it to work, doing tree work would have to be made illegal across the board.

That's too far-reaching. It would prohibit folk from tending to their own trees. Realistically it would have to be made illegal to do tree work for hire. Across the board. Then the state could grant permission (issue license) on a case-by-case basis.

I hate seeing hacked-up trees but don't know if I'm ready to take the leap of wanting yet more encroachment by "the man".
 
Licensing does not guarantee competence.(Just because someone passes a test doesn't mean they perform to a high standard)
Licensing does not ensure safety.
Licensing does not protect consumers.(Licenses may be revoked after someone gets shafted but there cannot be prior restraint)
Licensing increases costs.
Licensing infringes upon freedom.
Licensing sucks mightily.
Just Say NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I'm from Maryland, so I figured I ought to say some things here.

Our Tree Expert law has been around forever, I'm going to guess since the 1980's, just guessing.

It was originally made to help keep trees from being hacked and to protect homeowners from un-professionals. As, uneducated un-professional "trimmers" are the ones most likely to do topping and other butchery. You had to be a Tree Expert to perform TRIMMING for hire.

I am very glad Maryland started this Tree Expert requirement and the testing does weed out the uneducated very well.

For many years, to trim trees for hire, you had to have a Maryland Tree Expert License (and you still do). You did not have to have the license for removals. Which was fine with me, you aren't going to hurt a tree any worse than removing it, so I thought that was fine.

To get the Tree Expert License:
1. You have to qualify to take a test. Two ways to qualify:
A. have 5 years of continuous service working under a tree expert.
B. Have 2 years of an approved forestry college degree or more with 1 year then working for a tree expert.
2. You then take the test, written and also an outside ID test. Every subject in tree care is in the test. They give you a list of study items to prepare for it.
(you can retake if needed, and i think you only have to take the sections you failed. i think you need around a 70 or 75% on each section)
3. After passing the test. You show you have insurance for at least the minimums they require, only like $300,000 in liability I think.
4. Every year you have to renew. Only $10.00, but you have to show insurance every year too.

------------------------
Now, do we still get people hacking up trees. Yes. But probably way less then it would be.

Now say someone tops a tree. They could get in trouble, if they weren't a licensed expert (cause they were trimming for hire and not allowed to do so). Or, if the homeowner did not like what they did to the tree, the homeowner could call DNR and report the tree expert for incorrect trimming. Unfortunately, the tree experts don't get reprimanded by DNR unless the homeowner complains. So, you still get a few "tree experts" out there that know better, but don't care and will top your tree if you want them too.

-----------------------------------
NOW Get this!

Here's the crap that happened in 2005-2006.

Through voting, Maryland law changed the Tree Expert requirement to now be needed for Tree Removals. This is fine for me. Hey, I'm in business and it helps me and it does help the homeowner to be more protected against non-insured companies. Oh, and logging is excluded, you don't have to be an expert to perform logging. And, any tree under 20 feet can be removed without the license also.

But here's the CRAP!!!!!

There must have been some important people that were affected by this. There must have been some big winers. Cause within a few months after it passed, they said they were going to have to make an amendment.

Now, it would have made sense to "grandfather" in those companies that just did tree removals. By giving them a Tree Expert License with REMOVAL classification only.

But NO, here's what they did. Lets give out Tree Expert licenses to all those companies that can prove that they have done removals for at least the past 3 years. Lets GIVE them a license. The same license that everyone else has had to qualify to take the test for, and have had to have enough knowledge to pass that test, proving that they are educated enough to be called a Tree Expert.

You tell me. Why does doing tree removals for the past 3 years automatically make you a Tree Expert? How does it show you are educated in correct trimming, cabling and bracing, lighting protection, fertilizing, insects and disease, correct climbing methods and so on and so on. At least make them take the freakin test! Like EVERYONE else that is a tree expert has had to do. Or else give them a REMOVAL ONLY classification so they can continue to do what they have been doing.

The DNR guys I talked to weren't happy either. It was way above them. Someone or some people cried big time and had a lot of pull in politics.

This "grandfathering" giving people the tree expert license was a bunch of bull. This in my opinion ruined or lessened the value and image of being a license TREE EXPERT. It's over now, they gave them away for a year, I think it stopped in October 2006.

--------------------------------------
Tree Expert Licenses are a good thing. It helps promote good tree care and helps protect the homeowner and helps protect those that are professional. If your state does it, I hope it sticks to it.
---------------------------------

I saw that article commending Maryland too. I thought it was ironic. Since Maryland really degraded the Tree Experts by issuing them to people that don't even have to prove they know what they are doing.

-------------------------------
Here's some info from a DNR page:

DNR Offers Marylanders Tips On Choosing A Licensed Tree Expert
Recent law alters definition of tree expert to include tree removal

ANNAPOLIS — Marylanders looking to hire someone for tree removal or care need to be aware that the law concerning Maryland Tree Experts has changed. Under the old law, a person could remove a tree without being a Licensed Tree Expert. However, a bill passed during this year’s General Assembly now requires that persons performing tree care or removal for hire must be licensed by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The bill becomes effective Oct. 1.
The new law is designed to protect consumers from persons performing tree care or removal who are not licensed or insured. This is especially important because if an unlicensed Tree Expert performs work and something goes wrong (such as a tree falling on a house), it may be difficult to hold them liable. Improper tree care can take many years to correct and in some cases, it can’t be corrected.


“Contracting with an unlicensed firm is always risky and what seemed like a ‘good deal’ on tree work could turn into a nightmare after property damage or injury occurs at the hands of someone with no insurance or regulatory oversight,” said Steven W. Koehn, Director of the Maryland DNR Forest Service. “The new law provides added protection to both consumers and workers in the tree care industry; it’s also one of the best changes we’ve seen in this industry in many years.”
There are some ways to tell if a person whom you are considering contracting with for tree care is licensed or not. Follow these guidelines to ensure you are working with only a Maryland Licensed Tree Expert.

Ask to see their Tree Expert license. Any Licensed Tree Expert will carry a card that contains their three-digit Expert number and verifies their status as being licensed. Call DNR if you are not satisfied with the answer you receive, the Department maintains a complete list of Licensed Tree Experts.
Ask for proof of insurance. A Licensed Tree Expert will have personal and property damage insurance, as well as worker’s compensation insurance.
Ask for references. Find out where the company or person has done work similar to the work you are requesting. Don’t hesitate to check references or visit other sites where the company or individual has done tree work.
Get an estimate in writing. Licensed Tree Experts are required to enter into a written contract with a client. Be sure to read the contract carefully and make sure it includes information on when the work will be started and completed, who is responsible for clean-up, the total price and an hourly rate if more work needs to be done.
Be wary of individuals who solicit business door-to-door. While these individuals may appear to be offering lower costs for tree care services, be assured it’s no bargain. A person soliciting business door-to-door will often give a cell phone number and no other means of contact, thereby making it difficult to find them should a problem arise. Licensed Tree Experts must have an address of record and other contact info on file with the Department.
The Maryland DNR Forest Service maintains a list of nearly 600 Licensed Tree Experts throughout the state so finding one near you is easy. To search for a Tree Expert by type, company name or county, visit http://dnrweb.dnr.state.md.us/forests/oflists/lte/treeexpert.html. As a value-added benefit to consumers, the Tree Expert List contains additional information about the licensed tree experts linked from their business names. Any questions about Maryland Licensed Tree Exerts should be directed to Mike Galvin, Supervisor, Urban & Community Forestry, at 410-260-8507.

May 24, 2005
-------------------------------------------------------

Oh, and get this. I got my license around 1995(passed every part the first time, I did study a lot). I renewed it every year. But one year, I moved, around 2002. My renewal notice never got to me with the address change and busy me never thought about it. I didn't notice it till after the following year. Remember now, to renew, you just show insurance and pay $10.00. Anyway, too much time had passed by, so they said I had to take the test again. I agreed and did not cause a fuss, I felt stupid for forgetting it. They make the test harder and harder every year (which is good). I did not study at all, but passed everything the first time, which I was happy to see that I keep up on what is current. But, my point is this, I was a tree expert for at least 7 years, I forgot to pay the $10 renewal. I have always been insured. And I had to take the test over, but these guys doing tree removals are given a Tree Expert license! That's a bunch of crap.
 
Licensing does help you professionals!

Why do many of you become a Certified Arborist? So you can stand out from the rest.

Becoming a Licensed Tree Expert will do that too if your state creates that program.

And your state will help you keep the weekend warrior guys from taking your business. Those guys don't likely have the knowledge, insurance and other expenses that you do.

Like I said, our state only charges $10.00. They are clearly looking to make sure you are educated and insured, that's all.

No, not all the Licensed people will follow proper trimming practices and things, but at least they know how and should know better.
 
Definitely.

You can do all the work you want on your own trees, whether right or wrong.

Plus, you can do all the work you want to your neighbors trees or your friends trees or whatever, .....

as long as it is NOT for hire.

As long as you aren't being paid for the work you are doing, you don't have to be Licensed.
 
So now in MD the license is only about an insurance check? What a backslide. Tree advocates in the legislature got caught sleeping on that one. Or they sold out like this guy:

"a nightmare after property damage or injury occurs at the hands of someone with no insurance or regulatory oversight,” said Steven W. Koehn, Director of the Maryland DNR Forest Service. “The new law provides added protection to both consumers and workers in the tree care industry; it’s also *one of the best changes we’ve seen in this industry in many years.”*

So a change that slaps arborists in the face, puts treecudders on their level with no effort, and removes the protection that trees had against hacks is a good thing? I wonder what he's paid to lie like that.
 
yeah, they pretty much gave out "free" licenses for a year. No need to take the test like everyone else in the past has had to. Or, I think it's over now, I hope.

I was thinking maybe I should try to get my wife a free Maryland tree expert license. I just have to show my insurance coverages and show she worked for the company the past 3 years. She wouldn't have to know jack crap about trees, and she could be a new Maryland Tree Expert. Then I'd have two in my company.

I was also thinking about trying to enter my 4 month old daughter to get one too. Even though you have to be 18 years old, maybe the application could be filled out wrong. I wondered if they would catch it. She wouldn't have to take the test, so if we made it by on the application, she might have been able to get one too.

Another tree expert company owner was talking to me the other week. He said he talked to the DNR forest service and told them they should send him a ten-pack of licenses and he would just hand them out for them, to the fly-by-night tree services he would see working in the area.

The Maryland Tree Expert program had been great with the program and the standards. Great. I was proud to be a Maryland Tree Expert. But granting licenses in 2005-2006 without having to meet the standards has been a big let down and a big drop in the standards.
 
Its hard to keep up with everything, This is great information for Minnesota's Task force, Most of the negatives I hear here seem to arrive from mistakes? in currant laws and policies. I offer this rebuttal

kyLimbwalker
"Although I would like to see the number of tree workers limited," - I don't want to limit tree workers there is alot of work I just want to level the playing field!"
"I think that a better regulation would be self regulation."
--- I agree but There is no consequences for the people who will never care, Strong Licensing would at least mandate some standards.

guymayor
"What can we do? When witnessing an uninsured operation, provide their client some information (on a govt letterhead)"
---Unrealistic? I doubt you or I have the time to actually do that.(homeowner indignation, bootlegger in your face)
--- Daves MN License - Call the municipality (cell call easy!) if cops are not to busy - they come out shut em down and fine them starting at $500. 2nd offense $1000 double the fine everytime!!!

glens
"We should not forget that in law-speak the definition of "license" is "permission granted to do something that would otherwise be illegal". In order for it to work, doing tree work would have to be made illegal across the board.
That's too far-reaching. It would prohibit folk from tending to their own trees. Realistically it would have to be made illegal to do tree work for hire. Across the board."
--- I Disagree it would only apply to tree services for hire/$$$, Homeowners, line clearance companies, loggers, stump grinders, landscrapers operating below 12', removals under 20'(thanks X) would all be exempt.

Mike Poor
"Illinois had a Tree expert lic. decades ago but it didn't work out and is now defunct."
--- One of our Task force members took that test he said "it was the hardest test he ever took" Gary Johnson - Professor of Urban Forestry U of M. HE SAID THERE WAS NO ENFORCEMENT

Stumper
"Licensing does not guarantee competence.(Just because someone passes a test doesn't mean they perform to a high standard)"
--- I agree but it stands to reason that the boneheads who can't pass the test or meet the requirements would hopefully be fined out of the industry (if the legits turn him in)
"Licensing does not ensure safety."
--- Daves MN License You must submit a company safety policy (simple 1 page) get caught with out PPE risk forfieture of your license.
"Licensing does not protect consumers.(Licenses may be revoked after someone gets shafted but there cannot be prior restraint)"
---In the Mpls area we already have a hodgpodge of some 40 licences and another 40 cities with out. Homeowners could still get shafted but if they were a licensed company you could find them for recourse, the ripoff artists around here when the sh__ hits the fan can't be found.(if the legits are vigilant sooner or later he will get the fine, If you are like me, you can smell another tree company within a 1/2 mile of a jobsite)
"Licensing increases costs."
--- I agree, for companys and consumers. No doubt the price of treework would go up which should easily cover a $500 or more license fee, not to mention maybe a couple more jobs out there to pick up.
"Licensing infringes upon freedom."
--- I agree. freedom to not wear PPE, freedom to damage trees, to take cash, not pay sales taxes, not to pay WC, not pay state & fed taxes, not be responsible.
"Licensing sucks mightily."
--- I agree in MN our 40 unenforced city licenses are stupid!!
"Just Say NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
--- I disagree, but given our goverments incompetant actions here and a broad I can understand anybodys reluctance -- unless you just have something to hide

Leon
"I'm with Justin and Glen. The disadvantages far outweigh the benefits."
--- Is this because of some of the dismal license stories out there? I may be naive(?) but I would like to think a better mousetrap could be built given all the info out there.

xman
"Licensing does help you professionals!
Why do many of you become a Certified Arborist? So you can stand out from the rest.
Becoming a Licensed Tree Expert will do that too if your state creates that program.
And your state will help you keep the weekend warrior guys from taking your business. Those guys don't likely have the knowledge, insurance and other expenses that you do."

--- Thanks for all your input X, I believe a good license law could be created. I have heard from some of you MD boys that the removal exclusion was the problem with your license (along with minimal enforcement) sounds like they did hose you trimmers with that 1 yr grandfather rule. Do you think that a Industry elected board could have maybe squashed the politics that pushed that through? It also sounds like the program may be underfunded. Dependance on State funds to admin, enforce, & educate is a tall order for strapped state budgets. The Individual component Sounds very smart actually, but as a larger Tree firm that part scares me and seems like it would make it more difficult for us to operate. I also think it might be a hindrance to growing a company what are your thoughts on that?

I believe we as arborists need to help set the standards for the profession, we should protect our Industry with as much passion as we put into a technical removal or a new rope splice. We provide a valuable service to our communities and I for one am peeved that the Market will not allow me to pay our Top employees as well as a journeyman electrician or plumber.
mad.gif


Dave Nordgaard
 
[ QUOTE ]
"I'm with Justin and Glen. The disadvantages far outweigh the benefits."
--- Is this because of some of the dismal license stories out there? I may be naive(?) but I would like to think a better mousetrap could be built given all the info out there.


[/ QUOTE ]

Dave, You're probably right. In Minnesota it probably is possible. But when I think of the bloated out of control, corrupt state beauracracy in Hawaii I shudder to think of the mess they would make of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom