Posted by Dave Bender on March 4, 2008, 9:40 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

April, Good Friday Morning! I read HB5775 last night and I believe until I meet with Rep. Rich Myers - we will have to oppose this bill. When reading the bill, I thought that the language presented is more suited towards a certified arborist. In fact -- the arborists that i know and that are members of our association are the best best in the field -- they are professionals, based on their experience and the certification. Your certification progrem -- in my opinion is one of the best -- and I guess i don't understand why that in itself isn't enough to qualify as a "Tree Expert". The licensure is also problematic. First of all, it will not come close to generating enough fees to operate the licensure program. There is no way that the administration will increase headcount at IDOA to properly staff and monitor this if it were to become law. In addition, enforcement would be nearly impossible under the circumstances associated with budget. Finally, my chief concern is that this will greatly impact the nursery inspection program. In the 1990's - the inspection program had over 25 inspectors to cover the state. In 2000, IDOA was down to 17 inspectors, in 2002, headcount was at 13. With our help, that headcount was brough back to 18 in 2005 where it has remained steady since. However, Nurseries now only see their inspector at most - once per year and with the outbreak of EAB, they are spread so thin they have had difficulty issuing nursery licenses, routine audits and site visits. I would offer a suggestion that I believe would offer an alternative -- but it would take a couple of years to acheive...Our Irrigation members wanted to seek a licensure bill, to promote professionalism and maintain a level a integrity and protection of the water system. However, once we divided into this, we decided our purpose and intent would be best served with a certification bill. So, two years ago, we passed a law that requires each irrigation contractor to have at least one certified irrigation contractor (CIC) on staff. In addition if the irrigation firm designs irrigation systems, they must have a CID certification (certified irrigation design) on staff. We have been working on developing the rules with IDPH. It looks like the rules will be approved sometime this summer. The IA (Irrigation Association) would be the designated entity that would be required to conduct the certification testing. Once the rules are adopted -- the state will recongnize the IA's certification. I would believe the the ISA certification program would suffice as well for this purpose. Let me know if you have any questions.... Thanks! Dave Bender

 Post a Response

Posted by Mike Brunk on March 4, 2008, 8:38 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

I am surprised at the negative response to this bill. For a profession to be considered important enough for a state license law it has to be considered an advanced professional that requires skilled people. This consideration by the state is rare! Many professions would give their eye and first born for such a law, just ask any Landscape Architect. I see this as a great opportunity especially if we can get our two cents added to the law. If passed it is likely the law wont be perfect but it will be easier to change an existing law than to create new law, so its a foot in the door. I think the Tree Expert Licensing Act is good. But I would like to see some tweaking 1) Tree Expert title is dated and the public has been educated to look for certified arborist titles. I would argue we change Tree Expert to Certified Arborist, especially considering the law deals with urban trees. Foresters and traditional timber management are exempt and tree and limb felling as in traditional forestry is not a safe practice in urban situations. Also the law is for "shade and ornamental" trees and certified arborist diagnoses is better focused on public safety than a foresters timber management expertise. I also believe that college accreditation should be limited to "Urban Forestry" schools for these same reasons. 2)Why exempt governmental agencies, especially municipalities where people live and work under trees. Cities have the highest target zones for tree catastrophes and should therefore be considered a necessary component of this law. Dido for public utilities. I see so much over pruning which promotes the tree to flush aggressive growth towards power lines. Following good arboricultural practices reduces the reactionary growth, and therefore can reduce utility hazards. Utility pruning is some of the most dangerous tree work in the state, which I also believe to be a valid reason to include them in this binding law. 3)Change six month grace period to 24-36 months. 4)Licensing Board should include an IAA rep considering IAA is an ISA chapter and they are the certifying agency 5)Tree Board is to have two commercial arborists one of which has to be a pathologist and one a entomologist. I suggest we separate these and have two commercial arborists on the board as well as one pathologist and one entomologist. I think it important to have commercial experience on the board for purposes of hearings on license suspensions. 6)Maybe IAA should consider a lawyer who is versed in writing legislation and get him together with a legislative committee to see this legislation through the process. We utilized such a lawyer in our utility legislation a number of years ago. Lets not let policing limit us from taking advantage of a rare opportunity. The knowledgeable public many times report non complying professionals to the appropriate state dept. Also those that are licensed are watchful and help regulate those that break the practice laws. I for one think the law is very good for our profession and that it would be a plus even with limited policing. Mike Brunk Urbana City Arborist 706 S. Glover Ave. Urbana, IL 61802 217-384-2393 mjbrunk@city.urbana.il.us

 Post a Response

Posted by Jim Semelka on March 4, 2008, 8:37 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

Speaking as an old arborist who had (and still has...somewhere) an Illinois Tree Expert license, I hated to see it go. That was a tough test. I used to hold it up in comparison to my wife's state license as a Physical Therapist, and thought it added a great deal to the quality and standards of our profession. After all, that's what it is - a profession, and should be carried out by persons recognized as such. It would make enforcement of local ordinances much easier at a local level - "show me your license" - and I think we could use a little toughening of requirements for being an Arborist as well. Jim Semelka Urban Forestry Superintendent Certified Arborist, Municipal Specialist IL 0732 Village of Oak Park

 Post a Response

Posted by Jerome Scott on March 4, 2008, 8:35 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

We here at the Chicago Park District already require that tree contract work be done by a Certified Arborist. (that is, the work has to be done under the “supervision” of a CA) Clients, be they municipalities corporations or citizens, can require that just as much as they require a license. The difference is that without this law no one will be breaking the law by presenting themselves as a “tree expert” even if they are a hack. This is the sort of law that applies to smaller operators since larger operators already generally have the required certification. I see one drawback from this law as it is written: I received a forestry degree in 1997 and, following a forest inventory stint with the US forest Service, took a tree trimmer job in 2004 with a Chicago suburb. Up until then I had almost ZERO experience working with trees that did not leave the tree exactly as I had found it (except for the scribes or inventory tags). In 2006 I became a Certified Arborist, at about the time that I might have been qualified to present myself to a tree owner as a “tree expert.” As I read this law, for $50 I could have been a licensed “tree expert” with my forestry degree in 1997 even if I had no pruning experience. Jerome Scott District Forester Chicago Park District

 Post a Response

Posted by Robert Hendricksen on March 4, 2008, 8:33 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

Some additional thoughts, TCIA has an accreditation program which already is in place. The state could dovetail that into its law. Sure it a lot of paperwork, but it establishes a safe, reputable company. Furthermore, Hal's idea is accurate. Who would enforce such a law and what penalties. Without some form of enforcement, it is a useless law. I spoke with Illinois Department of Insurance. They themselves are understaffed with no hope in site for more enforcement help. There is a law stating each business has to provide workers compensation insurance. But if the department is already unable to enforce this policy how will the state enforce a tree license?

 Post a Response

Posted by Daren Mindham on March 4, 2008, 8:29 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

April: Devils advocate: Is this promotion for the ISA certification or do we not have another system of measure education, the cert. arborist test is not a skills test. Shouldn't a B.S., A.A.S. or A.S. supersede any certification over an ISA certification test? Will that be part of the license agreement? Will this be a license needing renewing? As always the boss usually knows how to trim trees but his workers are less knowledgeable and they still will not all have to be licensed cert. arborists, right? Plus, everyone is moving EAB wood. For example, how many people are putting branches at the bottom the garbage container for pickup? I hope some of these quick complaints or thoughts will help.

 Post a Response

Posted by Robert Hendricksen on March 4, 2008, 8:28 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

Dear April, Feel free to edit. As an arborist who is only 40, I wasn't around when there was a license. In my previous e-mail in regards to Hinsdale's effort to establishing a business license, this is better yet. I agree with Tom's thoughts and applaud the idea and efforts, especially on the eve of emerald ash borer. Once EAB hits in full force, you'll see a lot more landscaping companies switch to tree companies. A $200 lawn mower will traded in on a $200 chainsaw. Worse yet, accidents will go up and we'll be able to read about those accidents in the TCIA 'Tree Worker'. Let me know what I can do to help. Bob Hendricksen

 Post a Response

Posted by Hal Robson on March 4, 2008, 8:27 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

I am reading with interest the effort to have the Tree Expert Act passed in the Illinois legislature. Although no longer a resident of the state, I would still like to put my two cents worth in. Having been a praticing city arborist in the state for many years prior to my retirement, I was involved with the previous Tree Expert law back in the 60's, 70's & 80's. The largest problem with the law at that time was enforcement. The state had no enforcement arm willing to arrest and prosecute those who practiced without a license. That left enforcement up to the local governments. I filed a complaint against a commercial tree firm who was unlicensed through our local police department. He was arrested and prosecuted but the fine given was $50 and a warning to cease and desist from doing tree work until he got a license. In a very short time he was again doing tree work without a license. What he got was like a slap on the wrists. Frankly it wasn't worth my time and ef fort to be the only one in Illinois who was willing to police this law. I had commercial tree experts call me and tell me their was someone he had seen operating in our city without a license. I told him if that's the case call our police department and file a complaint. He never had the guts to do so. So, I'm saying if there is no enforcement the law isn't worth the paper it is written on. Hal Robson

 Post a Response

Posted by Tom Green on March 4, 2008, 8:22 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
72.135.217.208

Bomb Shell! How long ago was I talking about reinstating the Tree Expert Act (TEA)? I know I talked about it at the Past Presidents meeting at the 06 Annual Meeting. There seemed to be interest at that time but since I couldn't attend the 07 meeting I haven't heard much. I did discuss it after our 06 meeting with my elected representative, Mr. Rich Myers. He said he would run it past his colleagues, especially those in the area with EAB. I have always felt that the best way for EAB to get from you to me is via firewood. At 1/2 mile per year it will take it 400 years to fly to Macomb. Who generates and handles the most firewood? We do. The State knows all the firewood vendors, something they learned early on before we had EAB (at least before it was confirmed). Yet the State has no idea who is cutting down dead ash trees and where the wood is being taken. Today, in Macomb, a dead ash tree could be cut down without any inspection and it parts could be taken to any other place in this state without an inspection. There are no commercial arborists in Macomb. So a tree removal will be done by someone hired from outside the town and the tree will likely be taken (and dumped) in someone else's community. I think the reinstated TEA will help upgrade our profession and help the State gain some control on wood movement. OUT OF THE CLEAR BLUE SKY Late on 14 Feb Mr. Myers called my office phone and left a message he was introducing the TEA on the 15th in Springfield. I heard this message on the morning of the 15th and was unable to reach Mr. Myers. On Tuesday (19th) I obtained a copy of HB5775 Tree Expert Act as it was introduced. He said changes can be made later. I have attached this as a PDF file (26 pages) or you can go to the following web site and pull up a printable version of the bill. Overall, I think it is fairly good and similar to the old TEA. There are places I think need modification. But I want ALL out there to look at the TEA. I want your feedback. There may be those who will reject it totally; others who want it reinstated but with corrections. Let me know if you want it back or not. Let me know what changes you wish to see. I will only comment on one right now. On page 3, line 8 it states that applicants have 6 months to meet the criteria for licensing. Since there are more "arborists" in this state who are not certified than those who are this will cause a rush (6 months) for them to become certified. Only 1 person for a company needs to be certified. There will be an opportunity for the IAA to assist in training for certification. But 6 months is too short of a time for it to all happen. I would like to see 12- 24 months period for this to happen; with no Grandfather clauses. If you are certified and meet the other criteria, you won't have any problems. If you are not certified you must take the ISA test (and pass it) in this 12-24 month period. At least attempt to take the test in 12 months and if not passing it, get up to 12 more months to do so. I have some issues with other parts of it but I want the membership to respond. It has been introduced. Passage will need the backing and support of our organization. I am sorry that I didn't get any more notice about this that what I have stated. Send me your email comments; I will share them with April for all to see. Tom Green HB5775 http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=5775&GAID=9&GA=95&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=37432&SessionID=51

 Post a Response

Posted by April Toney on March 4, 2008, 7:16 am, in reply to "Illinois Tree Licensing Act Discussion"
63.170.19.23

I will attempt to post the messages received to date a little later (as time permits). I will do so in chronological order.

 Post a Response