Why are arborists afraid of risk assessment? - Featuring Marty Shaw
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- A lot of arborists tell me they're afraid of the liability that comes with tree risk assessment. I think those who say that have a fundamental misunderstanding about what tree risk assessment really is.
Hopefully this video helps explain why the fear of liability isn't justified. If you are an independent arborist or practitioner, I strongly advocate you consider offering risk assessment.
With more proficient arborists who are thorough with trees, we begin to move the needle away from production tree care, and towards conscientious tree care.
__
I think it is best to explore as much literature as possible, especially textbooks that are not created by the industry. While industry books are important, it is equally important to expose yourself to ideas that are not based on industry dogma. If you are considering moving towards becoming more professional, here are some books that may help.
Applied Tree Biology by Andrew Hirons and Peter Thomas
A Lifespan Approach by Neville Fay, Dirk Dujesiefken, Jan-Willem de Groot, and Nigel de Berker
Wood - The Internal Optimization of Trees by Claus Mattheck and Hans Kubler
Fungi and Trees by Lynne Boddy
Abiotic Disorders of Landscape Plants by the University of California
__
Here are links to the articles referenced in the video:
What does 'Tree Expert' really mean?
www.treefirst....
Visualizing Aging Trees
www.treefirst....
Killing Trees in the Urban Forest
www.treefirst....
Where to put Decay in Trees
www.treefirst....
Some of the other references were risk assessment reports of ours, which we can share upon request.
__
The best place to begin is right where you are.
Tree First
I've had my TRAQ since 2013 and I've always carried errors and omissions ins. Never once had to use it thankfully. But like the gentleman said "be thorough in your assessments".
Around the 4:40 mark, you make a comment about rope inspection. I'm glad to see you frame it this way and that you're thinking about how this relates to everyday arbs. Frankly, I have never understood how arbs are able to measure the risk in terms of tying their life in to a tree, and not be fundamentally able to relate the same to a tree owner. If you're not doing routine risk assessment every single day for yourself, you've really missed what is arguably the biggest step in arboriculture practice.
Totally right! You could say when we climb we're already doing risk assessment, or that we ought to be at least. Professional risk assessment doesn't deviate all that much from the daily things arbs are already doing. Great point.
This in my mind is a motivation for regulations similar to electric, health, or hair care. Some states are starting to establish a standard of for the industry in their location.
I couldn't agree more. I would love to see a barrier of entry into the field besides a chainsaw and pickup. ISA's certified arborist certificate is a place to begin, and I think a lot of arbs think it is a place to finish.
Damn. What he said ^
🆘 There is a major flaw with TRAQ. It’s missing local weather events and soils. Here in the PNW we frequently have severe windstorms each and every year. These are considerable factors when deciding if you want to live under a 180’ Douglas fir tree. When you have removed hundreds of “Healthy” trees off of homes, vehicles and people you start to realize TRAQ is meaningless. The ironic thing is all the dead trees that a TRAQ Arborist would deem unsafe are the ones that remain standing during windstorms. “Act of God” is an insurance term that is being over used. In fact, some of the major carriers are instructing their adjusters to stop using that phrase. Insurance companies are starting to cancel property owners due to multiple strikes from Healthy trees. If municipalities start denying permits to home owners for tree removals because a city Arborist says the tree is healthy, the municipalities will soon be held liable for any future damage or bodily injury. City Arborists (TRAQ) do not consider these other factors during their assessment. It’s a FACT a healthy tree can be located in the wrong spot. The reason tree companies don’t promote TRAQ services is because it’s not a realistic service for the customer. Three different Arborists (TRAQ) can give three different opinions regarding the tree. Very little knowledge is needed to conduct a TRAQ. An arborist certificate, which can be obtained in one month and a 3 day TRAQ course doesn’t give a person enough knowledge to tell anyone what their RISK is.
That's cool, I didn't know that "act of god" is being phased out.
Marty talked about a lot of the shortcomings of TRAQ and the ANSI A300 part 9 standard for risk assessment. I agree with both of what you are him say on those things. At the same time, I think the TRAQ program is a great way to be introduced into the subject.
ISA's certified arborist certificate is a beginner level qualification, and I would say the same about TRAQ too.
Although I disagree fundamentally on one thing here. I think it risk assessment is a totally realistic thing to offer to clients. At the core of things, I think the integrity and attentiveness of the person surpasses the importance of their qualifications.