Dear All,
This Station has received a copy of the Environment, Transport & Works Bureau (ETWB) Technical Circular (Works) No. 3/2006 on Tree Preservation recently & has carried out a general review on the subject. This Circular may affect local developers, consultants, contractors & certainly arborists. As this is an important document listing out the guidelines & principles on Tree Preservation work on Govt site as well as any private development on leased Govt land with tree protection clauses stated in, all those who are affected are encouraged to study the contents of this Circular which can be downloaded from:
http://www.etwb.gov.hk/UtilManager/tc/C-2006-03-0-1.pdf
The following points about this Circular are attempted by this Station for the interesting reading of our Members:
1. This is the most up-to-date guideline on Tree Preservation by ETWB with the agreement of a string of various Govt Depts including Housing Dept, AFCD, Buildings Dept, & LCSD. It is therefore broadly represented & will be referred by various Depts in future for tree practices.
2. This Circular should be used in conjunction with the Register of Old & Valuable Trees (OVT) in ETWB TCW No. 29/2004.
3. Lands Dept (LandsD) is responsible for coordinating Tree Preservation on leased land.
4. Definition of a Tree is if its trunk diameter measures 95 mm or more at a height of 1.3 m above ground level (DBH height). Some mature shrubs, palms, succulents & bamboos may also meet this category.
5. This is a Technical Circular & not an Ordinance. It has not been presented to the Legislative Council for the law making process. It also did not state whether this Circular had been consulted with academics, professional bodies, conservation groups or the general public. In the unlikely scenario of a Court challenge, the Court judgement can override this Circular if the other side can prove negligence or unreasonableness for certain practices within this Circular. Expert Witness will be required for such challenges.
6. Clauses 15 - 17 of this Circular put emphasis on the 'conservation & amenity value' of a tree, & encouraged tree transplant without making reference to tree size & age. There is no mention on the structure, hazard potential, safe & useful life expectancy of a tree. Aslo, no clear definition is given on how to determine on the 'conservation & amenity values'. This may become a point of dispute if such terms are only viewed upon as a subjective opinion without scientific guidelines backed up by valid research.
7. Clause 27 on Compensatory Planting is still taking the approach of 'balance sheet accountancy'. Compensatory Planting is required to be of ratio of not less than 1 : 1 in terms of quality & quantity. In short, it is 'an eye for an eye' approach disregarding whether the future site can really accommodate all the Compensatory Planting. We all have seen sites in HK squashed with 'compensated trees' without consideration for the future crown & root development. Such trees may not live long. This could be an arguing point in Court if so raised by the Defendant.
The other side of the argument is that in a lot of local sites, if sufficient space has to be provided for the healthy & long term survival of the 'compensated trees', there may be no room left for the structures to be installed. This is the agony in deciding upon the quantity of the 'compensated trees'. Just imagine how much room would the Tai Po Wishing Tree take for the crown & root healthy growth! Thereafter, the 'quality' of the compensatory trees was desired to be no less than 'heavy standard' (usually above 95mm DBH). This again seemed to be taking the China approach of 'the bigger is the better' & without the consideration of research finding that younger trees are more resilient & faster growing after installation.
8. Clause 28 stated that a clear height of 4.5 m or more is required for tree planting under elevated/overhead structures. Therefore, tree planting under canopies are allowed. This is a unique feature in HK whereas most parts of Western countries would not adopt such a practice for arboricultural reasons.
9. Clause 34 stated that the Senior Landscape Architect (SLA) or the Project Director of the landscape consultancy would be responsible for tree surgery work. Responsibility will bring liability. Poor pruning can bring about tree failure in future & has led to many court cases in the West over the years.
It is unfortunate that our society has not yet recognized Arborist as a profession, although this Station is trying hard to train up the first batch of Certified Arborists (CA) in our Govt Depts. Certified Arborist will receive training in pruning & will be tested in their credential for pruning knowledge, although not for the practical part up a tree with cutting tools. It may take some time before our currently trained CA's to become experienced enough to handle proper pruning in design & supervision. Pruning takes time & practice to master. Nursery experience is much prefered in line with literature research. Good nurserymen have to practice proper pruning in their production. CA's must touch trees. To be able to climb is even better.
10. Clause 35 specified the pruning method is to follow that of BS 3998:1989. There are only two pages (p.4 & p.5) giving information on pruning in this BS. Also, it was written in 1989, some 17 years ago whereas arboriculture has made tremendous advancement including the proclamation of Compartmentalization of Decay in Trees (CODIT) in the 1990's. In a Court action, tree failure following Clause 35 could be challenged by Arborists for effectiveness & the Judges will study all details given in order to achieve the final decisions.
11. Clause 35 has also made a positive move in requiring tree works to be carried out by contractors with a 'competent person with arboricultural knowledge' to supervise the work. Whereas such requirement is not required at the Project office or consultancy level as per stated anywhere in the Circular, it is now required at the contractor level. Clause 38 has defined such 'assigned person' to have training from institutes such as CITA (not that this Staiton is aware of for any arboricultural courses so offered so far) or similar courses as considered appropriate by the Architect/Engineer/Supervising Officer. This is a flexible definition as this gives the authorities the power to decide who will be acceptable to be the 'assigned person'. As more arborists are trained up in future including those so trained up by this Station, the career prospect for our CA & CTW (Certified Tree Worker --- Tree Climbing Specialist) may be promising.
12. Clause 39 went as far as requiring the Particular Specification to incorporate in the tender document that 'to require the contractor to assign a competent member of the site supervisory staff to oversee & supervise the tree works under the Contract'. This Station interprets such requirement as our CA/CTW are likely to be the acceptable personnels, with the CA overlooking the administrative & design matter, & CTW carrying out the actual tree work under the supervision of the CA. This Clause is very positive indeed.
13. Clause 40 spelled sout the punishment of tree damage or unauthorized removal of trees on site by the Contractor but it also mentioned the exemption condition of 'unless the Architect/Engineer/Supervising Officer is convinced that the incident is justifiable due to exceptional circumstances'. If such an event should happen for the contractor, a CA is best employed to honestly produce an explanation & defense. ISA CA's in HK so far have a reputation as being honest & possess good integrity, values that this Station wishes to maintain at least in our CA Family Channel. This Station hopes to turn over a new leaf for arboriculture in HK as different form general landscaping which has burnt itself into chaos due to intense competition in the past.
14. Clause 42 listed out clearly that trees on private land without a tree protection clause as a constraint will not be affected by this Circular. In short, land owner there can cut down any of their trees, with the exception of OVT, at will. This may be the area that our environmentalists & media wish to supervise in their activities, as these unprotected trees will be out of our Govt control.
15. Claus 43 gave criteria on cases of 'Serious Incidents of Unauthorized Tree Felling or Damage of Trees' to be those attracting 'media attention'. Therefore, our media will play an important part in reporting such malpractice.
16. Appendix B in this Circular gives definition on the responsibilities of various Govt Depts on their tree domain.
The above Circular has been a concerted effort by our Govt to protect our trees. As no regulation can be perfect, nor can it please everybody, at least we can see the intention & good conscience of our Govt to do her best within the resources available to protect the trees of HK for public interest. Tree preservaton in HK may be regarded to be lacking behind Western Nations by some, but it is now moving ahead with this Circular. Our Govt has done a good job in producing this Circular & deserve our respect indeed.
The above comments are meant to be constructive by this Station & can not be treated as legal advice. All above are meant to be merely intellectural discussion within our Station Members. Each individual reading it should carry out his/her own detailed analysis & feel the good intention behind it before making final decisions. As likely that this message will be pirated over the internet, any reader of this e-mail should study the above Circular with care & respect before entering into any hasty decisions.
best regards,
Sammy Au
ISA HK/China Correspondence Station Manager
ISA Certified Arborist no. ML-0174A
ISA Certified Tree Worker (Climbing Specialist) no. CTW-1645C
Member of International Plam Society
Member of Royal Horticultural Society, UK
Life Member of Intitue of Horticulture, HK
Co-owner of Huadu Eurasian Tree Farm (currently the only nursery in China trying to grow trees to ISA requirements, from seeds)
Monday, July 9, 2007
ISA HK/China --- Principles of ISA Tree Selection Method
***Station Mail is for the information of Station members only. Comments from non-Station Members will not be entertained.***
Dear Station Members,
Some prominent arborist said in the past that 'if the right trees are planted at the right places, arborists may be out of a job.' He can not be more correct. It is all too often that when the wrong trees were selected for the wrong places, coupling with poor nursery stocks & improper planting practice, that the trees would exhibit a variety of symptoms like poor growth, reduced flowering, general decline & eventual failure. At that time when the arborists is called in, there is usually very little he can do besides to advise to change the trees. When trees are not properly matched to the landscape site, they usually become more of a liability rather than asset. Just look at the thousands of tree failures after the mini typhoons in Aug 2006 in HK.
There are a few ISA publications on Tree Selection for technical viewing:
1. Arborists' Certification Study Guide --- ISA
2. Arboriculture --- Harris, Clark & Matheny
3. Tree Section & Planting (A Collection of CEU Articles) --- ISA
4. Introduction to Arboriculture (Tree ID & Selection) CD --- ISA
All above can be obtained on-line at ISA website.
Basically, ISA Tree Selection revolves around several major principles:
1. Matching Tree & Site
2. Site Considerations
3. Tree Considerations
4. Selecting Quality Nursery Stocks
Before all these would commence, it may be worthwhile to throw some light into the benefits of trees as a reason for tree planting:
"Trees are the tallest & longest living creatures on earth. They provide economic values throughout our civilization & they are the most prominent feature in a landscape. They provide clean air, flowers & fruits for our admiration. Trees also cool our summer heat & block unwanted views. Tree roots grasp soil from erosion & their canopies reduce rain run-off by capturing & holding water above. Recent research also found trees can have positive psychological effects such as reducing stress, reducing crime rate & reducing recovery time for hospital patients. Trees are part of our life & most human do not enjoy living in a desert."
After knowing the general benefits of trees, now we want to install trees into our urban landscape to dilute the concrete engulfment. This is how we can do it:
1. Matching Tree & Site
If the Tree Selection is only for short term objective, e.g. an exhibition, then there is no worry to use anything in anyway as long as the selection would survive the show. Some clients & designers use this principle for their project work of which the Defects Liability Period is only 12 months. Such thinking has installed a lot of wrong trees in the wrong places in the past in many locations. On the other hand, if the Tree Selection is for permanent use like roadside trees, park trees, hospital trees, etc., then the right trees must be matched for the right places for function & stability if these trees are to offer us their lifelong service.
All too often when the wrong trees are picked, heavy maintenance will follow & future performance of the trees becomes a liability, such as wind failure. In a place like HK where typhoons strike every summer, wind resistance should become a major concern over flower display which seems to be the over ridding priority in selecting a species. In addition, over fertilization & planting under shade seem to be the limiting factors locally in inhibiting flower display for many of our landscaping trees.
Matching tree & site is like putting on the right clothes for the event. If jacket & trousers are dressed for farming, like those seen up in China, these expensive clothings may not last for too long for the laborious work.
2. Site Considerations
It is recommended that a Site Analysis is to be carried out before selection of the species would begin.
In simple terms, site factors to be considered for the Tree Selection may include sunlight intensity, temperature range, moisture variation, irrigation, drainage, growing space above & below ground, soil condition, pest occurrence, prevailing wind, maintenance difficulties, etc. All these factors are essentials to ensure the long term performance & function of the selected trees. If one determining factor or more is/are to be ignored, like wind &/or drainage, the selected trees may go into a slow decline to eventually become a hazard to fail in the slightest wind in future.
Once the Site Analysis has been carried out, the next step would be to consider the Design Criteria. Design Criteria are based on the functions that the tree is expected to serve. Landscape functions include engineering & architectural considerations such as controlling pedestrian traffic, hiding unsightly building features, climatic control, pollution buffer, human comfort & aesthetic appearance. Among all these factors, the adequate growing space above & below ground is usually the limiting factor in HK because our city is already overcrowded with structures above & below ground for most municipal design.
3. Tree considerations
Factors to be considered here for the selected tree would include the cold hardiness, heat tolerance, growth rate, size at maturity, mature growth form, pest resistance & maintenance requirements. If the tree is to be selected for a difficult location such as hill top where irrigation is only from rain, or coastal front where salty wind prevails, species adaptation for the location is important.
In our city area where growing space above & below ground is usually a limiting factor, the mature tree form & size would be a priority consideration in the species selection. Some species can be kept small by constant structural pruning but many a times in HK, pruning is confused with topping which would cause sideway expansion of the crown which is the opposite desired effect. Introduced species with heavy flowering habit in its place of origin may not flower at all if the growing condition can not be matched locally. Certain species with invasive root development such as Ficus & Camphor, should be carefully screened off for planting near thinly covered pavement & bituminous surfaces. Species requiring a lot of water uptake such as Khaya should be placed away from where subsidence can be a problem like retaining wall. Species giving heavy shade may kill the grass below in courtyard & golf courses.
For roadside tree planting, the common practice in a lot of western countries would be using Excurrent Trees (tree with a central leader) for their predictable growth form in the design. Excurrent trees are also easier for Tree Stability Assessment calculations due to its uniform structure. Decurrent Trees (tree without a central leader) would likely be used for shade & flowering in parks & open spaces where sideway development of canopy is not a problem. Trees with non-aggressive root system like Lagerstroemia can be used near sewage pipes where root invasion is unlikely by such species.
4. Selecting Quality Nursery Stocks
Vigorous quality nursery trees will establish faster & develop stronger structure against wind sooner. Inferior stocks, like most from China nurseries at present, will drag their feet to take longer to establish & will invite heavier maintenance, & will perform poorly in wind. In a place like HK where typhoon is a yearly threat, wind resistance should be given precedent to flowering because if there is no tree left standing, there will be no flower to look at after wind.
ISA recommends the ANSI z60.1 2004 as the standard for nursery stocks selection. Previous Station Mail on Specification of Nursery Trees at ETF has taken essence from this international standard with local adaptation. If HK landscapers insist on using quality stocks from now, the China suppliers would have no choice but change their attitude in production if they want our business. The quality landscape to appear in HK in future will also influence our brothers & sisters up north who have been ferociously imitating western landscape design already.
ISA Tree Selection principles do not come by accident. It conglomerated 83 years of experience from commercial, research & utilities arborists all around the world who have learned through trail & error. Mistakes in the past become experience in the future. And that is the spirit of ISA arboriculture, the forever learning bunch of international arborists who always strife for the best...
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
Some prominent arborist said in the past that 'if the right trees are planted at the right places, arborists may be out of a job.' He can not be more correct. It is all too often that when the wrong trees were selected for the wrong places, coupling with poor nursery stocks & improper planting practice, that the trees would exhibit a variety of symptoms like poor growth, reduced flowering, general decline & eventual failure. At that time when the arborists is called in, there is usually very little he can do besides to advise to change the trees. When trees are not properly matched to the landscape site, they usually become more of a liability rather than asset. Just look at the thousands of tree failures after the mini typhoons in Aug 2006 in HK.
There are a few ISA publications on Tree Selection for technical viewing:
1. Arborists' Certification Study Guide --- ISA
2. Arboriculture --- Harris, Clark & Matheny
3. Tree Section & Planting (A Collection of CEU Articles) --- ISA
4. Introduction to Arboriculture (Tree ID & Selection) CD --- ISA
All above can be obtained on-line at ISA website.
Basically, ISA Tree Selection revolves around several major principles:
1. Matching Tree & Site
2. Site Considerations
3. Tree Considerations
4. Selecting Quality Nursery Stocks
Before all these would commence, it may be worthwhile to throw some light into the benefits of trees as a reason for tree planting:
"Trees are the tallest & longest living creatures on earth. They provide economic values throughout our civilization & they are the most prominent feature in a landscape. They provide clean air, flowers & fruits for our admiration. Trees also cool our summer heat & block unwanted views. Tree roots grasp soil from erosion & their canopies reduce rain run-off by capturing & holding water above. Recent research also found trees can have positive psychological effects such as reducing stress, reducing crime rate & reducing recovery time for hospital patients. Trees are part of our life & most human do not enjoy living in a desert."
After knowing the general benefits of trees, now we want to install trees into our urban landscape to dilute the concrete engulfment. This is how we can do it:
1. Matching Tree & Site
If the Tree Selection is only for short term objective, e.g. an exhibition, then there is no worry to use anything in anyway as long as the selection would survive the show. Some clients & designers use this principle for their project work of which the Defects Liability Period is only 12 months. Such thinking has installed a lot of wrong trees in the wrong places in the past in many locations. On the other hand, if the Tree Selection is for permanent use like roadside trees, park trees, hospital trees, etc., then the right trees must be matched for the right places for function & stability if these trees are to offer us their lifelong service.
All too often when the wrong trees are picked, heavy maintenance will follow & future performance of the trees becomes a liability, such as wind failure. In a place like HK where typhoons strike every summer, wind resistance should become a major concern over flower display which seems to be the over ridding priority in selecting a species. In addition, over fertilization & planting under shade seem to be the limiting factors locally in inhibiting flower display for many of our landscaping trees.
Matching tree & site is like putting on the right clothes for the event. If jacket & trousers are dressed for farming, like those seen up in China, these expensive clothings may not last for too long for the laborious work.
2. Site Considerations
It is recommended that a Site Analysis is to be carried out before selection of the species would begin.
In simple terms, site factors to be considered for the Tree Selection may include sunlight intensity, temperature range, moisture variation, irrigation, drainage, growing space above & below ground, soil condition, pest occurrence, prevailing wind, maintenance difficulties, etc. All these factors are essentials to ensure the long term performance & function of the selected trees. If one determining factor or more is/are to be ignored, like wind &/or drainage, the selected trees may go into a slow decline to eventually become a hazard to fail in the slightest wind in future.
Once the Site Analysis has been carried out, the next step would be to consider the Design Criteria. Design Criteria are based on the functions that the tree is expected to serve. Landscape functions include engineering & architectural considerations such as controlling pedestrian traffic, hiding unsightly building features, climatic control, pollution buffer, human comfort & aesthetic appearance. Among all these factors, the adequate growing space above & below ground is usually the limiting factor in HK because our city is already overcrowded with structures above & below ground for most municipal design.
3. Tree considerations
Factors to be considered here for the selected tree would include the cold hardiness, heat tolerance, growth rate, size at maturity, mature growth form, pest resistance & maintenance requirements. If the tree is to be selected for a difficult location such as hill top where irrigation is only from rain, or coastal front where salty wind prevails, species adaptation for the location is important.
In our city area where growing space above & below ground is usually a limiting factor, the mature tree form & size would be a priority consideration in the species selection. Some species can be kept small by constant structural pruning but many a times in HK, pruning is confused with topping which would cause sideway expansion of the crown which is the opposite desired effect. Introduced species with heavy flowering habit in its place of origin may not flower at all if the growing condition can not be matched locally. Certain species with invasive root development such as Ficus & Camphor, should be carefully screened off for planting near thinly covered pavement & bituminous surfaces. Species requiring a lot of water uptake such as Khaya should be placed away from where subsidence can be a problem like retaining wall. Species giving heavy shade may kill the grass below in courtyard & golf courses.
For roadside tree planting, the common practice in a lot of western countries would be using Excurrent Trees (tree with a central leader) for their predictable growth form in the design. Excurrent trees are also easier for Tree Stability Assessment calculations due to its uniform structure. Decurrent Trees (tree without a central leader) would likely be used for shade & flowering in parks & open spaces where sideway development of canopy is not a problem. Trees with non-aggressive root system like Lagerstroemia can be used near sewage pipes where root invasion is unlikely by such species.
4. Selecting Quality Nursery Stocks
Vigorous quality nursery trees will establish faster & develop stronger structure against wind sooner. Inferior stocks, like most from China nurseries at present, will drag their feet to take longer to establish & will invite heavier maintenance, & will perform poorly in wind. In a place like HK where typhoon is a yearly threat, wind resistance should be given precedent to flowering because if there is no tree left standing, there will be no flower to look at after wind.
ISA recommends the ANSI z60.1 2004 as the standard for nursery stocks selection. Previous Station Mail on Specification of Nursery Trees at ETF has taken essence from this international standard with local adaptation. If HK landscapers insist on using quality stocks from now, the China suppliers would have no choice but change their attitude in production if they want our business. The quality landscape to appear in HK in future will also influence our brothers & sisters up north who have been ferociously imitating western landscape design already.
ISA Tree Selection principles do not come by accident. It conglomerated 83 years of experience from commercial, research & utilities arborists all around the world who have learned through trail & error. Mistakes in the past become experience in the future. And that is the spirit of ISA arboriculture, the forever learning bunch of international arborists who always strife for the best...
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Poor nursery stocks planted in Sheung Shui
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
The attached photos show the quality of a recent tree planting in Sheung Shui. Please kindly excuse this Station for not giving the exact location because Station Mail only provides comments based on facts with our professional knowledge & without bias, & is never meant to attack anybody.
The tree species is Melaleuca leucadendron with a naturally strong Excurrent (Strong Central Leader) character. If grown in open ground, this tree would develop a straight Central Leader with a pyramidal shape in a predictable form. This tree can be easily grown in a nursery without much experience & would develop into good quality with minimum training. Even if they are neglected or planted too closely in our China nurseries, owing to their vast numbers in production, selection of quality trees is still possible if only 1 out of a hundred is to be picked. The Station Manger does not know of any difficulties in finding a small amount of quality Melaleuca trees in China nurseries in his 23 years of buying trees in China.
For Young Trees (below 100mm DBH) of this species as quality Nursery Stocks, we would be looking for:
1. Central Leader --- A strong & single trunk to grow vertically from base to tip. No double or multiple stem leaders. No Included Bark.
2. Taper --- A noticeable Taper thickening from base & gradually narrowing to tip for maximum wind resistance.
3. Live Crown Ratio --- A minimum of 50% of Live Crown Ratio (Ratio of height of foliage against the total height of a tree) for
adequate foliage to produce carbohydrate & better wind resistance. Trees get their food from Photosynthesis, not fertilizers.
4. Large Wound / Topping --- No mechanical wound of any kind larger than 50mm in diameter & no Topping, for decay prevention & future tree architecture.
5. 10 x DBH Rootball diameter --- The larger the rootball, the better is the survival chance & speedy recovery. BS 4043:1989 requires a 10 x trunk diameter rootball, so is recommended by ISA practices.
Above are just some minimum requirements for a Nursery Stocks grown to international standards.
By studying the pictures attached, would any of the trees shown meet the above criteria, say, only for above-ground requirements? If not, it is bad luck for all of us because they are already there, maybe waiting to be handed over for on-going maintenance.
Good Nursery Stocks is the fist step to success in any landscape & poor Nursery Stocks will lead to excessive maintenance & possible failures in future. If trees are not selected, planted, maintained & inspected properly & regularly, they would become more of a liability to the public rather than an asset, as has been shown in so many tree failures reported in the past.
Station Mail is circulated to many overseas countries nowadays. Would any of our overseas partners accept such trees to be their Nursery Stocks for use in their landscape? If so, we would like to learn of their valuable experience indeed for why.
Some of our Mature Trees have become time bombs in our territory. Is this how they were started in the first place?
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
The attached photos show the quality of a recent tree planting in Sheung Shui. Please kindly excuse this Station for not giving the exact location because Station Mail only provides comments based on facts with our professional knowledge & without bias, & is never meant to attack anybody.
The tree species is Melaleuca leucadendron with a naturally strong Excurrent (Strong Central Leader) character. If grown in open ground, this tree would develop a straight Central Leader with a pyramidal shape in a predictable form. This tree can be easily grown in a nursery without much experience & would develop into good quality with minimum training. Even if they are neglected or planted too closely in our China nurseries, owing to their vast numbers in production, selection of quality trees is still possible if only 1 out of a hundred is to be picked. The Station Manger does not know of any difficulties in finding a small amount of quality Melaleuca trees in China nurseries in his 23 years of buying trees in China.
For Young Trees (below 100mm DBH) of this species as quality Nursery Stocks, we would be looking for:
1. Central Leader --- A strong & single trunk to grow vertically from base to tip. No double or multiple stem leaders. No Included Bark.
2. Taper --- A noticeable Taper thickening from base & gradually narrowing to tip for maximum wind resistance.
3. Live Crown Ratio --- A minimum of 50% of Live Crown Ratio (Ratio of height of foliage against the total height of a tree) for
adequate foliage to produce carbohydrate & better wind resistance. Trees get their food from Photosynthesis, not fertilizers.
4. Large Wound / Topping --- No mechanical wound of any kind larger than 50mm in diameter & no Topping, for decay prevention & future tree architecture.
5. 10 x DBH Rootball diameter --- The larger the rootball, the better is the survival chance & speedy recovery. BS 4043:1989 requires a 10 x trunk diameter rootball, so is recommended by ISA practices.
Above are just some minimum requirements for a Nursery Stocks grown to international standards.
By studying the pictures attached, would any of the trees shown meet the above criteria, say, only for above-ground requirements? If not, it is bad luck for all of us because they are already there, maybe waiting to be handed over for on-going maintenance.
Good Nursery Stocks is the fist step to success in any landscape & poor Nursery Stocks will lead to excessive maintenance & possible failures in future. If trees are not selected, planted, maintained & inspected properly & regularly, they would become more of a liability to the public rather than an asset, as has been shown in so many tree failures reported in the past.
Station Mail is circulated to many overseas countries nowadays. Would any of our overseas partners accept such trees to be their Nursery Stocks for use in their landscape? If so, we would like to learn of their valuable experience indeed for why.
Some of our Mature Trees have become time bombs in our territory. Is this how they were started in the first place?
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Our Station is 2 years old
***Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only. Comments from non-Station members will not be entertained.***
Dear Station Members,
By the time this Station Mail is read, our Station is already over 2 years old.
In the past 2 years of ups & downs in our running, this Station has grown steadily with strength to a target well beyond the original intention. We have never planned to be what we are today. It just happened naturally with social participation. Anyone joining long enough in our Station would realize that we never hard-sell our Station Membership, but friends & neighbours found out about us & wanted to join. Of course we let them. It is an ISA Policy to open participation without discrimination in race, colour, religion & background. Anyone agreeing with our principles is welcomed to come in. Then we grow...
Our Station Mail is now circulated to HK, Macau, China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia & the USA. The media has given us a lot of exposure by interviewing & reporting our activities. The name of ISA has grown from something of an unknown two years ago to a household brand in our landscape industry. ISA tree standards & practice recommendations are accepted as a quality assurance for tree work.
By today, according to incomplete Station statistics, Station Membership is over 340 no. in active participation. Approx. 90% of our Station Members are degree holders & approx. 70% have Master Degree of some kind. About 1/4 are Senior Civil Servants, with the rest coming in from all kinds of professions. We embody Professors as well as Students, Politicians & Environmentalists, not to mention Landscapers (Designers & Practitioners) who form the largest group. Our diversification is vast when compared with other professional bodies in our society which serve only specific interest. Here we serve anybody interested. Our Station has provided a platform for all personnel to co-exist in peace & harmony, partly due to nobody knows who's who within our Station. Faction who may be displeased with the other side will talk in manner to the Station Manager, who will mediate for the best interest of all.
Since Feb 2005, this Station has helped Arbor Global of Hawaii to organize 4 CA exams & 4 CTW exams in our territory. From Apr 2007 onwards, our Station will begin to organize our own CA & CTW exam in our region with local Proctors. We are constantly observing & hawking on potential candidates to qualify for Proctorship. Depending on our future exam demand, we shall try to identify a few more Proctors to help out in organizing the event. It is our current Station policy to recommend Proctors out of the CA Family, since our Station will know them best in background & ability. Their participation in the CA family will provide observation for apprehending their plausibility to acquire Proctorship, & Proctors will help in the administration of the Station as well. In a way, the Station Manager is trying to phase out his own influence step by step, & try to invite sharing with his work.
In the Station activities, we have organized Study Tours to China, Singapore (twice) & Australia. We shall be organizing a delegation with a minimum of 10 participants to the ISA International Conference in Hawaii from July 28 - Aug 3 this summer. We have also helped to organize the first-ever Climbing Jamboree in HK/China under the leadership of CLP & Fung Kai School in Jan 2007, & our Station has trained the Fung Kai Climbers to climb professionally from scratch in just a few months. Our Station has been invited to give Tree Seminars at Housing Dept & Drainage Services Dept, & the Station Manager & Ken So have been invited to give regular lectures at the Construction Industry Training Authority for Tree Works Supervision training. Our Station has opened up Eurasian Tree Farm (ETF) in China for regular visit on Saturdays with ISA tree standards, Structural Pruning & Basic Tree Climbing demonstrated there since Dec 2006. Already dozens of Station Members have visited ETF in the past two months.
In our regional cooperation, our collaboration with the National Parks Board (Nparks) of the Singapore Govt has given us the opportunity to send our candidates to attend arborist training in Singapore. Nparks has now become our reference & back-up for regional arboricultural advisory on subtropical tree care practices. Through the help of Nparks & their training programs, we are able to reach out to Taiwan & China where Mandarin is the dominant language. Trained candidates in these two regions can attend ISA exams in Singapore or HK at their personal preference. Together with Nparks, we are gradually building a regional network of ISA Arborists in our part of the world.
Upon the Geelong Conference in Australia in Oct 2006, our Station has been invited to apply for the status of Associated Organization of ISA in our territory. This official status has brought us independence to run our own affairs to fit our local conditions, & growth has accelerated by some 20% in just a few months. We in particular have noticed the enrolment of non-landscapers who are genuine tree-lovers & wish to join just to learn more about trees. Our Station will certainly give them the correct information & their international practices.
Things are looking rosy in our Station development, although confusion would arise from time to time. This Station understands that we can not make everybody happy but we shall try our best. Our system is not the best designed & we are constantly looking at practical ways to upgrade it, without sacrificing social harmony nor the interest of the majority, & to be in line with ISA principles & policies. It is not an easy job but we shall try. After all, nothing ventured nothing gained.
Therefore, our Station will march on ahead, without funding & without an official structure, at least for the time being. While gathering strength & social respect, this Station will invite suitable personnel to join our leadership. Ken So of KFBG & Thomas CY Chow of Fung Kai School are two such promising helmsmen with keen participation at present. More will be invited in time. There are young & educated candidates with integrity & ability to join our leadership from the CA Family. All they need is participation & further training. The Station Manager sincerely believes we can form our own team & run our own affairs in our territory with success.
Another year of excitement is now waiting ahead of us. We look forward to be growing steadily again. May we learn from our mistakes & advance with confidence in our course to affirm arboriculture & ISA in our territory in the next 12 months to come. May we be able to present a better report than this one next February...
God bless.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
By the time this Station Mail is read, our Station is already over 2 years old.
In the past 2 years of ups & downs in our running, this Station has grown steadily with strength to a target well beyond the original intention. We have never planned to be what we are today. It just happened naturally with social participation. Anyone joining long enough in our Station would realize that we never hard-sell our Station Membership, but friends & neighbours found out about us & wanted to join. Of course we let them. It is an ISA Policy to open participation without discrimination in race, colour, religion & background. Anyone agreeing with our principles is welcomed to come in. Then we grow...
Our Station Mail is now circulated to HK, Macau, China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia & the USA. The media has given us a lot of exposure by interviewing & reporting our activities. The name of ISA has grown from something of an unknown two years ago to a household brand in our landscape industry. ISA tree standards & practice recommendations are accepted as a quality assurance for tree work.
By today, according to incomplete Station statistics, Station Membership is over 340 no. in active participation. Approx. 90% of our Station Members are degree holders & approx. 70% have Master Degree of some kind. About 1/4 are Senior Civil Servants, with the rest coming in from all kinds of professions. We embody Professors as well as Students, Politicians & Environmentalists, not to mention Landscapers (Designers & Practitioners) who form the largest group. Our diversification is vast when compared with other professional bodies in our society which serve only specific interest. Here we serve anybody interested. Our Station has provided a platform for all personnel to co-exist in peace & harmony, partly due to nobody knows who's who within our Station. Faction who may be displeased with the other side will talk in manner to the Station Manager, who will mediate for the best interest of all.
Since Feb 2005, this Station has helped Arbor Global of Hawaii to organize 4 CA exams & 4 CTW exams in our territory. From Apr 2007 onwards, our Station will begin to organize our own CA & CTW exam in our region with local Proctors. We are constantly observing & hawking on potential candidates to qualify for Proctorship. Depending on our future exam demand, we shall try to identify a few more Proctors to help out in organizing the event. It is our current Station policy to recommend Proctors out of the CA Family, since our Station will know them best in background & ability. Their participation in the CA family will provide observation for apprehending their plausibility to acquire Proctorship, & Proctors will help in the administration of the Station as well. In a way, the Station Manager is trying to phase out his own influence step by step, & try to invite sharing with his work.
In the Station activities, we have organized Study Tours to China, Singapore (twice) & Australia. We shall be organizing a delegation with a minimum of 10 participants to the ISA International Conference in Hawaii from July 28 - Aug 3 this summer. We have also helped to organize the first-ever Climbing Jamboree in HK/China under the leadership of CLP & Fung Kai School in Jan 2007, & our Station has trained the Fung Kai Climbers to climb professionally from scratch in just a few months. Our Station has been invited to give Tree Seminars at Housing Dept & Drainage Services Dept, & the Station Manager & Ken So have been invited to give regular lectures at the Construction Industry Training Authority for Tree Works Supervision training. Our Station has opened up Eurasian Tree Farm (ETF) in China for regular visit on Saturdays with ISA tree standards, Structural Pruning & Basic Tree Climbing demonstrated there since Dec 2006. Already dozens of Station Members have visited ETF in the past two months.
In our regional cooperation, our collaboration with the National Parks Board (Nparks) of the Singapore Govt has given us the opportunity to send our candidates to attend arborist training in Singapore. Nparks has now become our reference & back-up for regional arboricultural advisory on subtropical tree care practices. Through the help of Nparks & their training programs, we are able to reach out to Taiwan & China where Mandarin is the dominant language. Trained candidates in these two regions can attend ISA exams in Singapore or HK at their personal preference. Together with Nparks, we are gradually building a regional network of ISA Arborists in our part of the world.
Upon the Geelong Conference in Australia in Oct 2006, our Station has been invited to apply for the status of Associated Organization of ISA in our territory. This official status has brought us independence to run our own affairs to fit our local conditions, & growth has accelerated by some 20% in just a few months. We in particular have noticed the enrolment of non-landscapers who are genuine tree-lovers & wish to join just to learn more about trees. Our Station will certainly give them the correct information & their international practices.
Things are looking rosy in our Station development, although confusion would arise from time to time. This Station understands that we can not make everybody happy but we shall try our best. Our system is not the best designed & we are constantly looking at practical ways to upgrade it, without sacrificing social harmony nor the interest of the majority, & to be in line with ISA principles & policies. It is not an easy job but we shall try. After all, nothing ventured nothing gained.
Therefore, our Station will march on ahead, without funding & without an official structure, at least for the time being. While gathering strength & social respect, this Station will invite suitable personnel to join our leadership. Ken So of KFBG & Thomas CY Chow of Fung Kai School are two such promising helmsmen with keen participation at present. More will be invited in time. There are young & educated candidates with integrity & ability to join our leadership from the CA Family. All they need is participation & further training. The Station Manager sincerely believes we can form our own team & run our own affairs in our territory with success.
Another year of excitement is now waiting ahead of us. We look forward to be growing steadily again. May we learn from our mistakes & advance with confidence in our course to affirm arboriculture & ISA in our territory in the next 12 months to come. May we be able to present a better report than this one next February...
God bless.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- New Criteria in Tree hazard Assessment by USFS
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
When ISA arborists are called upon to do a Hazard Assessment (HA) for trees, frequently we would use the guidelines from the following ISA publication:
A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas by Matheny & Clark (1994) which works on a 12 point system for Hazard Analysis.
The Station Manager used to refer to this guide in many of his Tree Inspection & Tree Assessment in the past.
However, the Arborist Profession is an ever advancing profession. New ideas & new criteria frequently come up for review. Below is one of such cases which belongs to another powerful research institute in the world, the US Dept of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS, http://www.fs.fed.us/):
"In May 2004, more than 80 professionals from throughout the Mid-Atlantic participated in a second Urban Tree Risk Training Workshop hosted by the University of Maryland, Department of Natural Resource Science & Landscape Architecture. Tod Ericson, Urban and Community Forestry, Maryland DNR Forest Service, took the lead in developing the workshop, which built on a similar workshop hosted in the Midwest last September. Speakers from throughout the Mid-Atlantic States and FS Forest Health Protection program supported the workshop. Jill Pokorny, USFS, Plant Pathologist and Coordinating author of the recently published, " Urban Tree Management: A Community Guide to Program Design and Implementation", presented an historic overview of urban tree risk management and a systematic approach to designing community programs.
A diversity of professionals working in all aspects of urban and community forestry were represented, including state urban forestry and forestry professionals, landscape architects, county and municipal commissions representatives, communities, green industry, utilities, scientists, managers and others. More than half of the participant's surveyed hope to implement risk management programs and provide training on risk management."
After this landmark meeting, several new criteria about HA for trees have emerged. They include:
1. Critical Root Radius (CRR) --- Defined as 1.5 x DBH in feet. It is larger than the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of 1 inch DBH : 6 feet TPZ as defined in the ISA Arborists Certification Study Guide. If 40% of the roots in CRR are damaged, the tree is regarded to be in high risk of failure.
2. % of Stem Circumference Decayed / Damaged / Cankered --- If more than 40% of the circumference of any stem, branch, or root column is decayed / damaged / cankered, the tree is regarded to be in high risk of failure.
3. Ratio of Shell Thickness versus Stem Diameter --- The ratio of shell thickness (defined as the undecayed layer surrounding compartmentalized decayed column) versus Stem Diameter is 1 : 6 for Closed Shell (where the decay is enclosed) & 1 : 3 for Open Shell (when the cavity is exposed on the bark area) for acceptable stability in a tree with internal or external decay / damage / canker. Any ratio below this is regarded as having a high risk of failure.
4. % of Stem Constriction by Girdling Root --- If more than 40% of the tree's circumference is constricted by Girdling Root, the tree is regarded with high risk of failure.
5. % of Leaning --- If any tree, healthy or not, leans greater than 40 degree from vertical, the tree is regarded as having a high risk of failure.
6. Proximity of Target --- Any distance within 1.5 x Tree's Height is regarded as a Danger Zone to hit any target (people or object) within the accidental fall of the Hazard Tree.
7. Mis-conception in common Tree Assessment --- USFS experts reckoned that a lot of Tree Assessment were done by incorrectly evaluating the foliage colour & bloom of a tree for safety in the past. They reckoned that just because the crown is full & green, it doesn't necessary mean that the tree is structurally sound. Health & Vigour are related to energy supply. On the other hand, Structural Soundness is related to the condition of stem wood, branch attachment & anchoring roots.
Besides the above, Defects in trees were classified into 7 categories during Tree Inspection:
1. Decayed Wood --- Look for decay at above-ground & below-ground tree parts
2. Cracks --- Look for Shear Crack, Inrolled Crack, Ribbed Crack & horizontal Crack.
3. Root problem --- Check roots in CRR & for Girdling Roots.
4. Weak branch unions --- Look for Weak Union with crack, canker or decay. Check for large Epicormic Branches on decaying stem.
5. Cankers --- Look for area of infection to be over 40% of tree's circumference.
6. Poor Tree Architecture --- Look for 40% or more Leaning, Included Bark & other Weak Branch Attachments.
7. Dead Trees, Tops or Branches --- Look out for any dead tree, diebacks & lodged branches in canopy.
It was regarded by the USFS experts that all trees will fail some time in their life, but trees with defects would fail at the point of defect much more readily & predictably than trees without defect. It is therefore important to avoid causing defects in a tree by sound cultural practices & maintenance. Otherwise, trees will become a liability rather than an asset for the pubic. Outlines for good cultural practices were described by USFS website which were nearly identical to ISA practices.
For carrying out any Tree Inspection or HA, it is very important that the arborist can refer to certain guidelines or Industry Standards because every report the aborist would write may end up as Court evidence in the end no matter how unwillingly. ISA guidelines & ANSI's have been the references in the past. Now we begin to have the USFS guidelines as an extra reference.
Since the USFS guidelines are issued by a Federal Agency of the United States Govt & have legal status, the information so provided will be deemed highly credible in Court presentation in our territory as well as for public acknowledgement. This Station has noticed that some of the research were actually taking reference from ISA publications. USFS is a leading Forestry research organization in the world & United States is as big a country as China with climate, species & terrain diversities as vast as anyone would imagine. Their research does not just confine to temperate trees of a few hundred species like in some European countries. The professionalism & reliability of USFS can be almost accepted without doubt anywhere in the world.
Now with these new criteria in Hazard Assessment provided by USFS, ISA Arborists will have an extra source of reference for HA in their Tee Inspection & Tree Hazard Analysis. By putting together USFS & ISA together, ISA Arborists will be getting the best of both worlds with information & references unmatched by any single nation.
The Station Manager will begin to pioneer some of these new criteria in his next Tree Inspection.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
When ISA arborists are called upon to do a Hazard Assessment (HA) for trees, frequently we would use the guidelines from the following ISA publication:
A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas by Matheny & Clark (1994) which works on a 12 point system for Hazard Analysis.
The Station Manager used to refer to this guide in many of his Tree Inspection & Tree Assessment in the past.
However, the Arborist Profession is an ever advancing profession. New ideas & new criteria frequently come up for review. Below is one of such cases which belongs to another powerful research institute in the world, the US Dept of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS, http://www.fs.fed.us/):
"In May 2004, more than 80 professionals from throughout the Mid-Atlantic participated in a second Urban Tree Risk Training Workshop hosted by the University of Maryland, Department of Natural Resource Science & Landscape Architecture. Tod Ericson, Urban and Community Forestry, Maryland DNR Forest Service, took the lead in developing the workshop, which built on a similar workshop hosted in the Midwest last September. Speakers from throughout the Mid-Atlantic States and FS Forest Health Protection program supported the workshop. Jill Pokorny, USFS, Plant Pathologist and Coordinating author of the recently published, " Urban Tree Management: A Community Guide to Program Design and Implementation", presented an historic overview of urban tree risk management and a systematic approach to designing community programs.
A diversity of professionals working in all aspects of urban and community forestry were represented, including state urban forestry and forestry professionals, landscape architects, county and municipal commissions representatives, communities, green industry, utilities, scientists, managers and others. More than half of the participant's surveyed hope to implement risk management programs and provide training on risk management."
After this landmark meeting, several new criteria about HA for trees have emerged. They include:
1. Critical Root Radius (CRR) --- Defined as 1.5 x DBH in feet. It is larger than the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of 1 inch DBH : 6 feet TPZ as defined in the ISA Arborists Certification Study Guide. If 40% of the roots in CRR are damaged, the tree is regarded to be in high risk of failure.
2. % of Stem Circumference Decayed / Damaged / Cankered --- If more than 40% of the circumference of any stem, branch, or root column is decayed / damaged / cankered, the tree is regarded to be in high risk of failure.
3. Ratio of Shell Thickness versus Stem Diameter --- The ratio of shell thickness (defined as the undecayed layer surrounding compartmentalized decayed column) versus Stem Diameter is 1 : 6 for Closed Shell (where the decay is enclosed) & 1 : 3 for Open Shell (when the cavity is exposed on the bark area) for acceptable stability in a tree with internal or external decay / damage / canker. Any ratio below this is regarded as having a high risk of failure.
4. % of Stem Constriction by Girdling Root --- If more than 40% of the tree's circumference is constricted by Girdling Root, the tree is regarded with high risk of failure.
5. % of Leaning --- If any tree, healthy or not, leans greater than 40 degree from vertical, the tree is regarded as having a high risk of failure.
6. Proximity of Target --- Any distance within 1.5 x Tree's Height is regarded as a Danger Zone to hit any target (people or object) within the accidental fall of the Hazard Tree.
7. Mis-conception in common Tree Assessment --- USFS experts reckoned that a lot of Tree Assessment were done by incorrectly evaluating the foliage colour & bloom of a tree for safety in the past. They reckoned that just because the crown is full & green, it doesn't necessary mean that the tree is structurally sound. Health & Vigour are related to energy supply. On the other hand, Structural Soundness is related to the condition of stem wood, branch attachment & anchoring roots.
Besides the above, Defects in trees were classified into 7 categories during Tree Inspection:
1. Decayed Wood --- Look for decay at above-ground & below-ground tree parts
2. Cracks --- Look for Shear Crack, Inrolled Crack, Ribbed Crack & horizontal Crack.
3. Root problem --- Check roots in CRR & for Girdling Roots.
4. Weak branch unions --- Look for Weak Union with crack, canker or decay. Check for large Epicormic Branches on decaying stem.
5. Cankers --- Look for area of infection to be over 40% of tree's circumference.
6. Poor Tree Architecture --- Look for 40% or more Leaning, Included Bark & other Weak Branch Attachments.
7. Dead Trees, Tops or Branches --- Look out for any dead tree, diebacks & lodged branches in canopy.
It was regarded by the USFS experts that all trees will fail some time in their life, but trees with defects would fail at the point of defect much more readily & predictably than trees without defect. It is therefore important to avoid causing defects in a tree by sound cultural practices & maintenance. Otherwise, trees will become a liability rather than an asset for the pubic. Outlines for good cultural practices were described by USFS website which were nearly identical to ISA practices.
For carrying out any Tree Inspection or HA, it is very important that the arborist can refer to certain guidelines or Industry Standards because every report the aborist would write may end up as Court evidence in the end no matter how unwillingly. ISA guidelines & ANSI's have been the references in the past. Now we begin to have the USFS guidelines as an extra reference.
Since the USFS guidelines are issued by a Federal Agency of the United States Govt & have legal status, the information so provided will be deemed highly credible in Court presentation in our territory as well as for public acknowledgement. This Station has noticed that some of the research were actually taking reference from ISA publications. USFS is a leading Forestry research organization in the world & United States is as big a country as China with climate, species & terrain diversities as vast as anyone would imagine. Their research does not just confine to temperate trees of a few hundred species like in some European countries. The professionalism & reliability of USFS can be almost accepted without doubt anywhere in the world.
Now with these new criteria in Hazard Assessment provided by USFS, ISA Arborists will have an extra source of reference for HA in their Tee Inspection & Tree Hazard Analysis. By putting together USFS & ISA together, ISA Arborists will be getting the best of both worlds with information & references unmatched by any single nation.
The Station Manager will begin to pioneer some of these new criteria in his next Tree Inspection.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Message form ISA President - elect
Dear Station Members,
Below is a message received from the ISA President-elect Mr. Lauren Lanphear by this Station earlier today. It is full of encouragement & appreciation of the arboricultural development in our territory. Mr. Lanphear is also deeply interested in our culture & has been to China some 26 years ago. This is exciting news indeed.
Our Station is proud to be contacted by the ISA President-elect who has shown his beloved care & concern about our development. We sincerely wish to see the expected visit of Mr. Lanphear come true very soon to our territory, & we hope to prepare ourselves & our trees for it. Having the next ISA President to be interested in our culture & our region is certainly a bonus for all of us. When the ISA President can come to HK, the media will follow & we shall receive support, although we do not know what to show the world really.
Our Station wishes to thank Mr. Lanphear for his loving attention for us & we look forward to receiving him in our territory soonest.
Thank you, Mr. Lanphear.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
----- Original Message -----
From: Lauren S Lanphear (FCTP)
To: egc@netvigator.com
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:33 AM
Subject: Hong Kong ISA & Tree Climbing Jamboree
Sammy,Congratulations on your 1st Climbing Jamboree to be held at the Fung Kai School in Hong Kong on Saturday January 20th! How very exciting.My wife, Susan, and I visited China, including Hong Kong over 26 years ago, in 1980. At the time, we were only 24 & 23 years old, and had been married only 2 years. What an incredible time to have visited China. Since travel to China for US citizens had really only opened up in 1972, our visit in 1980 saw a China that had had very little interaction with the western world for many decades. As you well know, things have changed dramatically since then.
As president-elect of the ISA, I have been impressed with the efforts of you and other Hong Kong arborists to bring ISA to China. In particular, your & Kevin Eckert's activities with ISA Certification and the Tree Climbing Jamboree are tremendous. Since its founding over 82 years ago, the ISA has maintained a consistent emphasis on research, education and the exchange of ideas. With the building of a strong relationship between ISA and Hong Kong's arborists, this brings an even broader global scope to the research, education, and exchange of ideas.
Over those 82+ years the ISA has been consistent in its mission, "Through research, technology, and education promote the professional practice of arboriculture and foster a greater public awareness of the benefits of trees." This is a truly great accomplishment and is a tribute to the dedicated and committed involvement of ISA's members and leadership over the years. You, and the rest of Hong Kong's arborists, ISA Certified Arborists, and ISA members are now part of those dedicated and committed members!
Please pass along my personal congratulations and words of encouragement to your colleagues.If, during the remaining months of my term as ISA President-elect, or anytime during my 2-year term as ISA President that begins in August '07, I can be of assistance to your efforts in any manner, please don't hesitate to call upon me. It would certainly be an honor and privilege for me to attend and possible speak at one of your conferences during the next 2 1/2 years.
My trip to China in 1980 ignited in me a life-long interest in your part of the world. It would be so very exciting to see the many changes, and especially to visit with Hong Kong arborists (something that I did not do back in 1980).Again, congratulations on your inaugural Tree Climbing Jamboree this Saturday. I wish only the best for it.
Very sincerely yours,
LaurenMr. Lauren S. Lanphear, President-electInternational Society of Arboriculture And President Forest City Tree Protection Co., Inc.
ISA Certified Arborist OH-5071A
email: llanphear@forestcitytree.comphone: 216-381-1700 (office) 216-470-9707 (cell)fax: (216) 381-18941884 South Green RoadSouth Euclid, OH 44121CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication & any attachment(s) are confidential & privileged, intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you receive this transmission in error or are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon this email communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at (216)381-1700 & delete this e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation.18 USC Sections 2510-2521, (Electronic Communications Privacy Act), applies to e-mail, prohibits unauthorized interception, unauthorized use unauthorized disclosure of the e-mail & its contents, and provides for civil remedies, including an award of damages for unauthorized actions.
Below is a message received from the ISA President-elect Mr. Lauren Lanphear by this Station earlier today. It is full of encouragement & appreciation of the arboricultural development in our territory. Mr. Lanphear is also deeply interested in our culture & has been to China some 26 years ago. This is exciting news indeed.
Our Station is proud to be contacted by the ISA President-elect who has shown his beloved care & concern about our development. We sincerely wish to see the expected visit of Mr. Lanphear come true very soon to our territory, & we hope to prepare ourselves & our trees for it. Having the next ISA President to be interested in our culture & our region is certainly a bonus for all of us. When the ISA President can come to HK, the media will follow & we shall receive support, although we do not know what to show the world really.
Our Station wishes to thank Mr. Lanphear for his loving attention for us & we look forward to receiving him in our territory soonest.
Thank you, Mr. Lanphear.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
----- Original Message -----
From: Lauren S Lanphear (FCTP)
To: egc@netvigator.com
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:33 AM
Subject: Hong Kong ISA & Tree Climbing Jamboree
Sammy,Congratulations on your 1st Climbing Jamboree to be held at the Fung Kai School in Hong Kong on Saturday January 20th! How very exciting.My wife, Susan, and I visited China, including Hong Kong over 26 years ago, in 1980. At the time, we were only 24 & 23 years old, and had been married only 2 years. What an incredible time to have visited China. Since travel to China for US citizens had really only opened up in 1972, our visit in 1980 saw a China that had had very little interaction with the western world for many decades. As you well know, things have changed dramatically since then.
As president-elect of the ISA, I have been impressed with the efforts of you and other Hong Kong arborists to bring ISA to China. In particular, your & Kevin Eckert's activities with ISA Certification and the Tree Climbing Jamboree are tremendous. Since its founding over 82 years ago, the ISA has maintained a consistent emphasis on research, education and the exchange of ideas. With the building of a strong relationship between ISA and Hong Kong's arborists, this brings an even broader global scope to the research, education, and exchange of ideas.
Over those 82+ years the ISA has been consistent in its mission, "Through research, technology, and education promote the professional practice of arboriculture and foster a greater public awareness of the benefits of trees." This is a truly great accomplishment and is a tribute to the dedicated and committed involvement of ISA's members and leadership over the years. You, and the rest of Hong Kong's arborists, ISA Certified Arborists, and ISA members are now part of those dedicated and committed members!
Please pass along my personal congratulations and words of encouragement to your colleagues.If, during the remaining months of my term as ISA President-elect, or anytime during my 2-year term as ISA President that begins in August '07, I can be of assistance to your efforts in any manner, please don't hesitate to call upon me. It would certainly be an honor and privilege for me to attend and possible speak at one of your conferences during the next 2 1/2 years.
My trip to China in 1980 ignited in me a life-long interest in your part of the world. It would be so very exciting to see the many changes, and especially to visit with Hong Kong arborists (something that I did not do back in 1980).Again, congratulations on your inaugural Tree Climbing Jamboree this Saturday. I wish only the best for it.
Very sincerely yours,
LaurenMr. Lauren S. Lanphear, President-electInternational Society of Arboriculture And President Forest City Tree Protection Co., Inc.
ISA Certified Arborist OH-5071A
email: llanphear@forestcitytree.comphone: 216-381-1700 (office) 216-470-9707 (cell)fax: (216) 381-18941884 South Green RoadSouth Euclid, OH 44121CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication & any attachment(s) are confidential & privileged, intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you receive this transmission in error or are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon this email communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at (216)381-1700 & delete this e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation.18 USC Sections 2510-2521, (Electronic Communications Privacy Act), applies to e-mail, prohibits unauthorized interception, unauthorized use unauthorized disclosure of the e-mail & its contents, and provides for civil remedies, including an award of damages for unauthorized actions.
ISA HK/China --- Loving you by Topping you
Dear All,
I was shocked to see this!! Trees growing healthily on the central divider of the Sheung Shui Highway facing Choi Yuen Estate were topped & mutilated in just a few days. These trees have been there for nearly 20 years & their lower limbs were elevated enough to miss the traffic below. They were well formed & majestic. Now they have a fate like as shown. The attached photos give some of the details of their current condition.
What would happen if topping is done to a tree?
1. Structural damage --- The central leader is removed & the tree will grow sideway instead of upright. This is the last thing we want for a street tree. The sideway branching habit will cause obstruction to traffic, property & street lighting. The structure of the tree is destroyed & a potentially hazardous tree is created.
2. Profused sprouting --- The topped tree will try to regain its ability to phtosynthesize by producing massive sprouting at the point of topping. These newly grown sprouts are genetically weakly attached to the branches for a number of years until strong branch union is developed. If at any one time such resprouted branches would grow big enough to attract wind, they may break easily & fall upon pedestrians, traffic & properties. Such profused sprouting is commonly confused with a tree regaining vigor. In fact it is not. It is expending its reserved energy to try to stay alive instead of gaining it. It would make the tree weaker & prone to pathogens attack.
3. Weakened root system --- The roots below will become weakened when the branches above are suddenly removed. In the natural process of shedding, the energy & nutrients from the shedded branches will be first transferred to the other parts of the tree including roots before the shedding would take place. In the case of topping, the stored energy & nutrients are just removed without recycling. The roots below which obtain their photosynthates from the leaves above are just suddenly cut off & starved. Starved roots mean stress & pathogens will find a way for entry. Then the tree would go into decline.
4. Decay --- Proper cuts should always be made at the nodes. Topping would just cut anywhere. The branch protection zones are destroyed. This would open wounds & create stubs as food for the micro-organisms. Decay would spread quickly. Internal cracks & cankers would develop. Insects like borers would quickly find these weakened spots & drill into them. The structure of the tree will be further weakened. Many trees toppled this way after apparently standing still for a few years.
5. Ugly looking --- Who would want to have a tree with branches sticking up to the sky like incense burning on a pot? Would it not be bad Fung Shui for some people?
Above are just the main points. There are also other points. For those of you who would like to further study into the topic, I recommend you to look at:
1. An Illustrated Guide to Pruning, 2nd edition, by Edward Gilman
2. Tree Pruning - A World wide Photo Guide, by Alex Shigo
3. Modern Arboriculture, by Alex Shigo (This one is the heavy weight & is really meant for the real professionals)
All 3 books can be obtained through the Store at the website of ISA (www.isa-arbor.com). ISA members will get a sizable discount.
I can see these topped trees might be deemed for transplantation. Since the lorry bed in HK is usually less than 3m in width, the trees were topped in order to fit them on to a lorry for transport. It is also much convenient & cheaper to move a smaller tree than a tree with full crown & large rootball. Therefore it may be done for economic reasons. Then may I ask why think of transplantation for these trees in the first place? The answer may be to 'save' them from felling. So some tree lovers decide to save the trees by topping them. And what may they get at the end? Possibly hazardous trees with potential killing power. Is this not an ambiguous case of "Loving you by slowly killing you"?
I am sure the same event would not happen for a govt project in London, Melbourne or even Singapore these days. It would happen everyday somewhere in China though. Are we so desparately trying to catch up with the practices of our brothers & sisters up north? I thought we have 50 years. That's certainly something we need to think about.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
PS: 'Topping' is also called 'Heading' by arborists. The two terms mean exactly the same practice.
I was shocked to see this!! Trees growing healthily on the central divider of the Sheung Shui Highway facing Choi Yuen Estate were topped & mutilated in just a few days. These trees have been there for nearly 20 years & their lower limbs were elevated enough to miss the traffic below. They were well formed & majestic. Now they have a fate like as shown. The attached photos give some of the details of their current condition.
What would happen if topping is done to a tree?
1. Structural damage --- The central leader is removed & the tree will grow sideway instead of upright. This is the last thing we want for a street tree. The sideway branching habit will cause obstruction to traffic, property & street lighting. The structure of the tree is destroyed & a potentially hazardous tree is created.
2. Profused sprouting --- The topped tree will try to regain its ability to phtosynthesize by producing massive sprouting at the point of topping. These newly grown sprouts are genetically weakly attached to the branches for a number of years until strong branch union is developed. If at any one time such resprouted branches would grow big enough to attract wind, they may break easily & fall upon pedestrians, traffic & properties. Such profused sprouting is commonly confused with a tree regaining vigor. In fact it is not. It is expending its reserved energy to try to stay alive instead of gaining it. It would make the tree weaker & prone to pathogens attack.
3. Weakened root system --- The roots below will become weakened when the branches above are suddenly removed. In the natural process of shedding, the energy & nutrients from the shedded branches will be first transferred to the other parts of the tree including roots before the shedding would take place. In the case of topping, the stored energy & nutrients are just removed without recycling. The roots below which obtain their photosynthates from the leaves above are just suddenly cut off & starved. Starved roots mean stress & pathogens will find a way for entry. Then the tree would go into decline.
4. Decay --- Proper cuts should always be made at the nodes. Topping would just cut anywhere. The branch protection zones are destroyed. This would open wounds & create stubs as food for the micro-organisms. Decay would spread quickly. Internal cracks & cankers would develop. Insects like borers would quickly find these weakened spots & drill into them. The structure of the tree will be further weakened. Many trees toppled this way after apparently standing still for a few years.
5. Ugly looking --- Who would want to have a tree with branches sticking up to the sky like incense burning on a pot? Would it not be bad Fung Shui for some people?
Above are just the main points. There are also other points. For those of you who would like to further study into the topic, I recommend you to look at:
1. An Illustrated Guide to Pruning, 2nd edition, by Edward Gilman
2. Tree Pruning - A World wide Photo Guide, by Alex Shigo
3. Modern Arboriculture, by Alex Shigo (This one is the heavy weight & is really meant for the real professionals)
All 3 books can be obtained through the Store at the website of ISA (www.isa-arbor.com). ISA members will get a sizable discount.
I can see these topped trees might be deemed for transplantation. Since the lorry bed in HK is usually less than 3m in width, the trees were topped in order to fit them on to a lorry for transport. It is also much convenient & cheaper to move a smaller tree than a tree with full crown & large rootball. Therefore it may be done for economic reasons. Then may I ask why think of transplantation for these trees in the first place? The answer may be to 'save' them from felling. So some tree lovers decide to save the trees by topping them. And what may they get at the end? Possibly hazardous trees with potential killing power. Is this not an ambiguous case of "Loving you by slowly killing you"?
I am sure the same event would not happen for a govt project in London, Melbourne or even Singapore these days. It would happen everyday somewhere in China though. Are we so desparately trying to catch up with the practices of our brothers & sisters up north? I thought we have 50 years. That's certainly something we need to think about.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
PS: 'Topping' is also called 'Heading' by arborists. The two terms mean exactly the same practice.
ISA HK/China --- Lion Tail Pruning in North District
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
Attached photos show a recent pruning job somewhere in North District where the Station Manager frequently passes by. The trees were originally planted too close as a start but have somehow adapted to the site conditions & were thriving. Then for some unknown reasons, they were pruned in a 'Lion Tail' fashion by some maintenance contractors within a day.
Lion Tailing happens when excessive inner branches are removed, leaving a small portion of foliage at the end of every branch, rendering the branch to appear like a lion's tail. Lion Tailing leaves too much weight at the ends of branches & causes limbs to over-elongate, possibly resulting in sunburn, water sprouts, or even death of the tree. This effect is particularly exaggerated in windy condition. Sometimes many water sprouts are produced, guaranteeing annual removal to keep limbs clean of sprouts. Sometimes Crown Raising or Crown Thinning is confused with Lion Tail Pruning & excessive end weight in a tree may cause the tree to topple in wind. The Station Manager has studied the photos of the failed OVT in Battery Path in Central in mid-June & has noticed this mature tree was Lion-Tailed by pruning before failure.
Some international Arborists would regard Lion Tailed Pruning as a tree abuse at its worst along with Topping. Yet if our Station Members would look around our trees in streets & parks whether Govt or private in HK, Lion Tail Pruning seems to be a preferred method whether or not a tree would really need a trim. In international practices, any tree requiring work on it would first need be examined by an Arborist who would study for problems before prescribing treatment for health, structure or safety. Pruning may be one of the recommendations. This is like a patient going to a doctor for examination before receiving prescription, & treatment without diagnosis is mal-practice ! However in our territory, we seem to apply this principle for humans but not for trees. Trees are treated as wastes & would be pruned at pleasure whether required or not. Some maintenance contracts would even require regular pruning below a certain height. If nothing is done, the contractors will not be paid. Maybe this is why most of our trees in streets & parks are Lion Tailed.
To prune a tree without objectives would be like cutting body parts off somebody without reason. Why should we do it to a tree whereas we do not do it to a person ??
Aren't trees forgiving ?
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
Attached photos show a recent pruning job somewhere in North District where the Station Manager frequently passes by. The trees were originally planted too close as a start but have somehow adapted to the site conditions & were thriving. Then for some unknown reasons, they were pruned in a 'Lion Tail' fashion by some maintenance contractors within a day.
Lion Tailing happens when excessive inner branches are removed, leaving a small portion of foliage at the end of every branch, rendering the branch to appear like a lion's tail. Lion Tailing leaves too much weight at the ends of branches & causes limbs to over-elongate, possibly resulting in sunburn, water sprouts, or even death of the tree. This effect is particularly exaggerated in windy condition. Sometimes many water sprouts are produced, guaranteeing annual removal to keep limbs clean of sprouts. Sometimes Crown Raising or Crown Thinning is confused with Lion Tail Pruning & excessive end weight in a tree may cause the tree to topple in wind. The Station Manager has studied the photos of the failed OVT in Battery Path in Central in mid-June & has noticed this mature tree was Lion-Tailed by pruning before failure.
Some international Arborists would regard Lion Tailed Pruning as a tree abuse at its worst along with Topping. Yet if our Station Members would look around our trees in streets & parks whether Govt or private in HK, Lion Tail Pruning seems to be a preferred method whether or not a tree would really need a trim. In international practices, any tree requiring work on it would first need be examined by an Arborist who would study for problems before prescribing treatment for health, structure or safety. Pruning may be one of the recommendations. This is like a patient going to a doctor for examination before receiving prescription, & treatment without diagnosis is mal-practice ! However in our territory, we seem to apply this principle for humans but not for trees. Trees are treated as wastes & would be pruned at pleasure whether required or not. Some maintenance contracts would even require regular pruning below a certain height. If nothing is done, the contractors will not be paid. Maybe this is why most of our trees in streets & parks are Lion Tailed.
To prune a tree without objectives would be like cutting body parts off somebody without reason. Why should we do it to a tree whereas we do not do it to a person ??
Aren't trees forgiving ?
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
IS AHK/China --- Legal framework for Tree Climbing & Practices
*** Attention pirates: We can not stop you from reading our correspondences, but do not broadcast your own messages to our members without their permission. Our members are the elite of the HK/China society & do not want to hear from you without prior consent. If you break this rule, you have intruded into our privacy & each member of our Station may take their own individual actions towards you which will be outside the control of this Station. May you be warned on this!! ***
Dear All,
In view of the potential danger in tree climbing & other related tree care practices so carried out at present by untrained workers in HK, this Station has been researching on the legal aspects of tree work for some months already.
According to the latest statistics released by ISA (p.51 Arborist News Dec 2005), tree care profession ranks 4th highest for fatalities in the USA, approximately 3 times higher than that of Police & Firefighters. Although there is no specific statistics for such in HK, I myself have been in the landscaping profession in HK for over 22 years & I have been many cases of injuries relating to tree work, in particularly in tree climbing with the traditional way, from among the contractors. Most of the injuries came from slip & fall from a tree, & some came from cut wounds from saws & other tools.
Although HK is behind in establishing tree laws like other Western countries, there are actually relevant laws which indirectly govern the responsibilities of tree workers & their employers in their work. The Chapter 509 Occupational Safety & Health Ordinance (CAP 509) is one of them.
CAP 509 sec 6 states:
(1) Every employer must, so far as reasonably practicable, ensure the safety & health at work of all the employer's employees.
(2) The cases in which an employer fails to comply with subsection (1) include (but are not limited to) the followings:
(a) a failure to provide & maintain plant & systems of work that are, so far as practically reasonable, safe & without risks to health;
(c) a failure to provide such information, instruction, training & supervision as may be necessary to ensure, so far as reasonably pracicable, the safety & health at work, of the employer's employees;
(e) a failure to provide or maintain a working environment for the employer's employees that is, as far as reasonbly practicable, safe & without risks to health.
In the case of tree climbing, this would mean proper approved climbing gears & sanctioned training for the tree climbers. This will mean more than just a safety belt & a ladder, but the complete set of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), approved rope, saddle, carabiners, saws, etc. The definition of sanctioned ' training' will be the judgement of the court, but ISA Certified Tree Worker (CTW) training which is an internationally accepeted credential will be given important weighing by the judges.
Further, CAP 509 sec 33 (1) states:
Where the person convicted of an offence against this Ordinance is a company & it is proved that the offence was committed with the consent or connivance of, or was attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the company, the director, manager, secretary or other similar officer shall be guilty of the like offence.
This defines the liabilities of the employer & the management.
To elaborate on the training to be provided by the employer, the CAP 509A sec 51 (1) states:
An employer must provide his employees with such training as will be necessary for avoiding or minimizing the risks to the safety & health of those employees when they are undertaking manual handling operations which may creat safety & health risks.
This clearly defines all tree workers must be trained before they can enter into tree care operations, such as tree climbing & elevated pruning.
When accident involving tree work happens, it would usually be the insurance company challenging the employer on breaking the CAP 509 & try to avoid paying. The insurer, if they know it, would employ an arborist to substantiate a report blaming on the negligence of the employer on non-compliance to the CAP 509. If the court finds the employer guilty of such, the employer may have to face all the claims alone. The employer may then try to blame on the supervising body on allowing him to perform his guilt on site under supervision & charge ' Vacarious Liability' from the supervising body. Afterall, the supervising body should not allow untrained workers without the proper equipment to carry out the job. There should be specifications forbidding that to happen. If not, the supervising body may have to face inquiry into why untrained workers without proper equipment are allowed to do skilled work, & this can lead to 'Professional Negligence' on the supervising body. If such is the case, then everybody would be dragged in & it will be one big unhappy family.
This may be something the employers should pay attention to.
Lets hope our law now can reduce fatality & injury in our business.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear All,
In view of the potential danger in tree climbing & other related tree care practices so carried out at present by untrained workers in HK, this Station has been researching on the legal aspects of tree work for some months already.
According to the latest statistics released by ISA (p.51 Arborist News Dec 2005), tree care profession ranks 4th highest for fatalities in the USA, approximately 3 times higher than that of Police & Firefighters. Although there is no specific statistics for such in HK, I myself have been in the landscaping profession in HK for over 22 years & I have been many cases of injuries relating to tree work, in particularly in tree climbing with the traditional way, from among the contractors. Most of the injuries came from slip & fall from a tree, & some came from cut wounds from saws & other tools.
Although HK is behind in establishing tree laws like other Western countries, there are actually relevant laws which indirectly govern the responsibilities of tree workers & their employers in their work. The Chapter 509 Occupational Safety & Health Ordinance (CAP 509) is one of them.
CAP 509 sec 6 states:
(1) Every employer must, so far as reasonably practicable, ensure the safety & health at work of all the employer's employees.
(2) The cases in which an employer fails to comply with subsection (1) include (but are not limited to) the followings:
(a) a failure to provide & maintain plant & systems of work that are, so far as practically reasonable, safe & without risks to health;
(c) a failure to provide such information, instruction, training & supervision as may be necessary to ensure, so far as reasonably pracicable, the safety & health at work, of the employer's employees;
(e) a failure to provide or maintain a working environment for the employer's employees that is, as far as reasonbly practicable, safe & without risks to health.
In the case of tree climbing, this would mean proper approved climbing gears & sanctioned training for the tree climbers. This will mean more than just a safety belt & a ladder, but the complete set of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), approved rope, saddle, carabiners, saws, etc. The definition of sanctioned ' training' will be the judgement of the court, but ISA Certified Tree Worker (CTW) training which is an internationally accepeted credential will be given important weighing by the judges.
Further, CAP 509 sec 33 (1) states:
Where the person convicted of an offence against this Ordinance is a company & it is proved that the offence was committed with the consent or connivance of, or was attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the company, the director, manager, secretary or other similar officer shall be guilty of the like offence.
This defines the liabilities of the employer & the management.
To elaborate on the training to be provided by the employer, the CAP 509A sec 51 (1) states:
An employer must provide his employees with such training as will be necessary for avoiding or minimizing the risks to the safety & health of those employees when they are undertaking manual handling operations which may creat safety & health risks.
This clearly defines all tree workers must be trained before they can enter into tree care operations, such as tree climbing & elevated pruning.
When accident involving tree work happens, it would usually be the insurance company challenging the employer on breaking the CAP 509 & try to avoid paying. The insurer, if they know it, would employ an arborist to substantiate a report blaming on the negligence of the employer on non-compliance to the CAP 509. If the court finds the employer guilty of such, the employer may have to face all the claims alone. The employer may then try to blame on the supervising body on allowing him to perform his guilt on site under supervision & charge ' Vacarious Liability' from the supervising body. Afterall, the supervising body should not allow untrained workers without the proper equipment to carry out the job. There should be specifications forbidding that to happen. If not, the supervising body may have to face inquiry into why untrained workers without proper equipment are allowed to do skilled work, & this can lead to 'Professional Negligence' on the supervising body. If such is the case, then everybody would be dragged in & it will be one big unhappy family.
This may be something the employers should pay attention to.
Lets hope our law now can reduce fatality & injury in our business.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Legal framework against tree topping
*** Attention pirates: We can not stop you from reading our correspondences, but do not broadcast your own messages to our members without their permission. Our members are the elite of the HK/China society & do not want to hear from you without prior consent. If you break this rule, you have intruded into our privacy & each member of our Station may take their own individual actions towards you which will be outside the control of this Station. May you be warned on this!! ***
Dear All,
Ever since the several occasions of reporting tree topping by this Station in the past, this Station with the help of the CA Family, has been at the same time investigating any regulation or law in HK to be against this detrimental practice by workers & supervising bodies. HK believes in the rule of law, & it is really our laws that govern a lot of our behaviours. Conscience has little match for greed.
The laws of HK, by at large, come originally from the English Legal System, which in turn is based upon Statue Law & Precedent from Case Law evolved over the last thousand years or so. This Station has not found any law of HK directly linked to forbid against tree topping so far. We do not have a Tree Protection Order like in the UK. However, if a tree is topped & fails later, the tree owner can have the right to pursuit a civil negligence law suit against the persons(contractor?) doing it, as well as to the party supervising the work(consultant?).
One significant case in the matter of professional negligence is cited by the case of Bolam-v-Friern Hospital Management Committee, [1957]2.All E.R.18, in which Judge McNair stated, in the case which involved medical negligence (pages 425-426 of 14):
A doctor is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordanc ewith a practice accepted as proper by a resonable bosy oif medical men skilled in that particular art. It does not matter that ther is a body of opinion who take a contrary view.
Significantly, he went on to state that:
This statement is, of course, equally applicable to other professions...... & that the most practical suggestion for profession-recommendations of their professional bodies, for example financial reporting standards & other pubished material.
Based on this case precedent, as prudent landscapers, if we are to look for protection of negligence from the case law above, then we should be following the published guidelines of our professional bodies. For ISA Certified Arborists, this will be that of the ISA. For other landscapers in HK, this would probably be the BS 3998: 1989 Recommendation for Tree Work which is a commonly accepted landscaping Standard in HK among the Govt & Consultants.
This Station has studied into the 'Pruning' section of the BS 3998: 1989. In Section 13.1.1 Cuts, it states that :
Pruning cuts should, wherever possible, be made at a fork or at the main stem to avoid stumps, which can die back, & dense regrowth of shoots. Removal of large braches should only be carried out when it is unavoidable, & wounds from such work should be kept as small as possible.
Effectively, this statement is clearly all against ' Topping' & has stated the avoidable steps to prevent Topping & its consequence.
In Section 13.7 of the same Standard on Pollarding, it states:
Note: Topping & lopping are synonymous for pollarding.
Pollarding.....should not be used on trees that have not been previously pollarded, as the large wounds created initiate serious decay in mature & maturing trees.
Note: Very heavy pruning may kill some species..... while others will be stimulated to produce a proliferation of very dense regrowth of shoots from around the wound. Such shoots grow vigorously & have weak attachments to the tree making trees potentially dangerous unless recutting is done frequently.
This is a further statement by the BS 3998 against Topping a tree.
This Station can cite further literature against Topping from other sources if the above is not considered adequate.
So, what is the consequence of all these? If known to the tree owner, the tree owner has the right to take up a civil negligence case to sue the workers & the supervisors for topping his tree!! He can claim that the professionals are not acting in accordance with the practicising guidelines of their profession, & are subject to ' Professional Negligence'. If an arborist is brought in to provide ' expert witness', the chance of winning the case in court, & thus damages, can be highly in favour of the tree owner.
Can the landscape professionals seek shelter by calling tree topping a common practice in HK? This is a case of ' maybe' for the workers since they are under supervision, but would be difficult for the supervisors who are supposed to be trained & qualified for the work. In any case, the ' Vacarious Liability ' issue will fall upon the heads of the supervisors & there has been many case predcedents to support such an issue. The chance for the supervisors to escape claims might be dim.
With this legal framewrok now established, it may be hard for anyone to enjoy topping a tree & call it a normal landscaping practice any more. This will include nursery stocks coming from China which are usually topped to save transport & handling costs. If the supervisors accept topped trees, they can be liable for their failures in the years to come.
Hopefully our trees in HK can be saved from continuing destruction by topping, if our laws now can do something about it.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear All,
Ever since the several occasions of reporting tree topping by this Station in the past, this Station with the help of the CA Family, has been at the same time investigating any regulation or law in HK to be against this detrimental practice by workers & supervising bodies. HK believes in the rule of law, & it is really our laws that govern a lot of our behaviours. Conscience has little match for greed.
The laws of HK, by at large, come originally from the English Legal System, which in turn is based upon Statue Law & Precedent from Case Law evolved over the last thousand years or so. This Station has not found any law of HK directly linked to forbid against tree topping so far. We do not have a Tree Protection Order like in the UK. However, if a tree is topped & fails later, the tree owner can have the right to pursuit a civil negligence law suit against the persons(contractor?) doing it, as well as to the party supervising the work(consultant?).
One significant case in the matter of professional negligence is cited by the case of Bolam-v-Friern Hospital Management Committee, [1957]2.All E.R.18, in which Judge McNair stated, in the case which involved medical negligence (pages 425-426 of 14):
A doctor is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordanc ewith a practice accepted as proper by a resonable bosy oif medical men skilled in that particular art. It does not matter that ther is a body of opinion who take a contrary view.
Significantly, he went on to state that:
This statement is, of course, equally applicable to other professions...... & that the most practical suggestion for profession-recommendations of their professional bodies, for example financial reporting standards & other pubished material.
Based on this case precedent, as prudent landscapers, if we are to look for protection of negligence from the case law above, then we should be following the published guidelines of our professional bodies. For ISA Certified Arborists, this will be that of the ISA. For other landscapers in HK, this would probably be the BS 3998: 1989 Recommendation for Tree Work which is a commonly accepted landscaping Standard in HK among the Govt & Consultants.
This Station has studied into the 'Pruning' section of the BS 3998: 1989. In Section 13.1.1 Cuts, it states that :
Pruning cuts should, wherever possible, be made at a fork or at the main stem to avoid stumps, which can die back, & dense regrowth of shoots. Removal of large braches should only be carried out when it is unavoidable, & wounds from such work should be kept as small as possible.
Effectively, this statement is clearly all against ' Topping' & has stated the avoidable steps to prevent Topping & its consequence.
In Section 13.7 of the same Standard on Pollarding, it states:
Note: Topping & lopping are synonymous for pollarding.
Pollarding.....should not be used on trees that have not been previously pollarded, as the large wounds created initiate serious decay in mature & maturing trees.
Note: Very heavy pruning may kill some species..... while others will be stimulated to produce a proliferation of very dense regrowth of shoots from around the wound. Such shoots grow vigorously & have weak attachments to the tree making trees potentially dangerous unless recutting is done frequently.
This is a further statement by the BS 3998 against Topping a tree.
This Station can cite further literature against Topping from other sources if the above is not considered adequate.
So, what is the consequence of all these? If known to the tree owner, the tree owner has the right to take up a civil negligence case to sue the workers & the supervisors for topping his tree!! He can claim that the professionals are not acting in accordance with the practicising guidelines of their profession, & are subject to ' Professional Negligence'. If an arborist is brought in to provide ' expert witness', the chance of winning the case in court, & thus damages, can be highly in favour of the tree owner.
Can the landscape professionals seek shelter by calling tree topping a common practice in HK? This is a case of ' maybe' for the workers since they are under supervision, but would be difficult for the supervisors who are supposed to be trained & qualified for the work. In any case, the ' Vacarious Liability ' issue will fall upon the heads of the supervisors & there has been many case predcedents to support such an issue. The chance for the supervisors to escape claims might be dim.
With this legal framewrok now established, it may be hard for anyone to enjoy topping a tree & call it a normal landscaping practice any more. This will include nursery stocks coming from China which are usually topped to save transport & handling costs. If the supervisors accept topped trees, they can be liable for their failures in the years to come.
Hopefully our trees in HK can be saved from continuing destruction by topping, if our laws now can do something about it.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Latest development in Tree Stability Assessment
Dear Station Members,
ISA arboriculture is an advancing profession, & even more so after the possession of relevant credentials. This is what making ISA Arborists around the world the leaders in their field. ISA Arborists simply do not rest on their laurels.
For those who are now studying for the Certified Arborist (CA) exam, p.138 of the Arborists' Certification Study Guide on Tree Assessment & Risk Management section states that:
"There are a number of formulas to estimate the amount of a trunk that is decayed. Most formulas are based on determining the proportion of sound wood relative to stem/branch diameter. While the formulas vary, most experts agree that a threshold of 30 to 35 percent loss requires that some action be taken. If there are large cavity openings or other aggravating factors, the threshold drops to 20 to 25 percent."
It is possible that the above statement would come from the research of Mattheck & Breloer (1994) which is widely adopted in America by arboricultural practitioners, in which:
t / R > 0.3
t = radial thickness of sound wood
R = radius of the stem
However, in p. 31 of the Arborist News Dec 2006 edition, Jerry bond of Davey Tree Expert has challenged this formula with additional statistics provided by the German research of Wessolly & others, & claimed that :
"The ratio t / R can no longer be used by itself as an index of trunk failure potential" in p.33 of this article.
As a Practising Arborist, one of our important job is to assess the failure potential of a tree to advise our clients. This latest research has prompted the Station Manager to think twice in his future assessment by just quoting the t / R ratio alone for consideration & recommendation. Since Drilling & Ultrasonic Tests merely describe the extent of the hollowness (decay?) inside a tree primarily, but the arborist would need to draw conclusion from the results obtained & to make a recommendation. The simple ratio of t / R > 0.3 may apply on its own no more....
In the conclusion of Jerry Bond's article, he stated that (p.34) " The practitioner in front of a tree with a centred cavity should use t / R in conjunction with evaluation of other factors that contribute to failure: wind load, exposure, crown architecture & species". This then comes back in line with the lower half of the same paragraph in the Arborists' Certification Study Guide (p. 138) that "It is difficult to determine how much sound wood is required to support a given tree. Variables include the strength of the wood, the canopy size & configuration, defects, & any number of environmental factors."
Therefore, as can be seen once again, mathematical models & equipment should be used as guidelines only in Tree Stability Assessment. It seems to be that they can not replace completely the experience & observation of the Practising Arborist. Trees are living creature & quantifying their behaviour by simple mechanical means may lead to unexpected outcome. We simply have to respect our brain & Mother Nature.
As for those taking the next CA exam, there is no need to panic over this issue. As Chief Proctor in our region, the Station Manger has not yet received any instruction on amendment of content of the CA exam over this particular subject. If so, the latest information will be released on Station Mail immediately. Therefore, work hard, be humble & best of luck!
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA arboriculture is an advancing profession, & even more so after the possession of relevant credentials. This is what making ISA Arborists around the world the leaders in their field. ISA Arborists simply do not rest on their laurels.
For those who are now studying for the Certified Arborist (CA) exam, p.138 of the Arborists' Certification Study Guide on Tree Assessment & Risk Management section states that:
"There are a number of formulas to estimate the amount of a trunk that is decayed. Most formulas are based on determining the proportion of sound wood relative to stem/branch diameter. While the formulas vary, most experts agree that a threshold of 30 to 35 percent loss requires that some action be taken. If there are large cavity openings or other aggravating factors, the threshold drops to 20 to 25 percent."
It is possible that the above statement would come from the research of Mattheck & Breloer (1994) which is widely adopted in America by arboricultural practitioners, in which:
t / R > 0.3
t = radial thickness of sound wood
R = radius of the stem
However, in p. 31 of the Arborist News Dec 2006 edition, Jerry bond of Davey Tree Expert has challenged this formula with additional statistics provided by the German research of Wessolly & others, & claimed that :
"The ratio t / R can no longer be used by itself as an index of trunk failure potential" in p.33 of this article.
As a Practising Arborist, one of our important job is to assess the failure potential of a tree to advise our clients. This latest research has prompted the Station Manager to think twice in his future assessment by just quoting the t / R ratio alone for consideration & recommendation. Since Drilling & Ultrasonic Tests merely describe the extent of the hollowness (decay?) inside a tree primarily, but the arborist would need to draw conclusion from the results obtained & to make a recommendation. The simple ratio of t / R > 0.3 may apply on its own no more....
In the conclusion of Jerry Bond's article, he stated that (p.34) " The practitioner in front of a tree with a centred cavity should use t / R in conjunction with evaluation of other factors that contribute to failure: wind load, exposure, crown architecture & species". This then comes back in line with the lower half of the same paragraph in the Arborists' Certification Study Guide (p. 138) that "It is difficult to determine how much sound wood is required to support a given tree. Variables include the strength of the wood, the canopy size & configuration, defects, & any number of environmental factors."
Therefore, as can be seen once again, mathematical models & equipment should be used as guidelines only in Tree Stability Assessment. It seems to be that they can not replace completely the experience & observation of the Practising Arborist. Trees are living creature & quantifying their behaviour by simple mechanical means may lead to unexpected outcome. We simply have to respect our brain & Mother Nature.
As for those taking the next CA exam, there is no need to panic over this issue. As Chief Proctor in our region, the Station Manger has not yet received any instruction on amendment of content of the CA exam over this particular subject. If so, the latest information will be released on Station Mail immediately. Therefore, work hard, be humble & best of luck!
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Introduction to Urban Forestry
Dear Station Members,
At the Sep 06 CA Training by Arbor Global in Fung Kai School, the Station Manager was requested by two Station Members to write on two separate topics: Termites & Urban Forestry. Since Termites were then a more pressing topic, the 'Termite Talk' was quickly released in Station Mail in Oct 06. The Station Manager has not forgotten his pledge to write on Urban Forestry though. Now this is how an introduction of this immense topic is to be presented ....
The term of Urban Forestry seems to contradict itself. How can we call it a forest if it is situated in an urban area? Our normal understanding of Forestry would be those up in the hills with eco-system intertwined. The commercial interest of Forestry studies also seems to lie upon the economic value of wood for products. However, when we come to think of the trees in our parks, housing estates, roadside, community centres, institutes & other public places inhabited by population, it is not difficult to imagine that we do have a form of eco-system in our urban areas. Urban Forestry mainly intermingles with human activities, our city life.
Trees in our urban forest usually do not have the luxury of an ideal growing condition of the natural environment, but rather have to struggle for survival in an environment designed for human needs. For example, urban soil is usually depleted of organic matters & lacks microbial activities. Even if by adding in form of compost, once used up within a few months in our subtropical climate, topping up by natural process will be unlikely. Then there is the heat island effect, lack of growing space, drainage problem, wind gusts created by building structures & traffic, contamination by pollutants, human vandalism, incorrect planting practices & a whole range of other abuses to sustain. It is a miracle that our trees can survive in such hostile conditions at all ! Aren't trees forgiving??
Statistics in western countries showed that Street Trees usually have a Functional Life Span of only a few years. In 2004 in Los Angeles, some survey gave a result of only 7 years. Most of the roadside trees in HK would be regarded as an object for removal in terms of structure & health by international standards, & yet their retention seems to be a compromise between conservation & politics really. If our attitude towards trees comes any closer to that of the western countries, maybe at least half of our roadside trees will be a target of removal soon enough.
In countries practicing Urban Forestry, Urban Foresters will usually begin involvement at the planning stage of any development like providing Tree Survey, Arboricultural Assessment & Selection of Tree Species . Urban Foresters would generally report directly to the City Council & would be the second person on site after the Land Surveyor. They will decide upon which trees to retain, remove or transplant with their professional knowledge in accordance with the local laws. They are likely to advise on tree protection in construction sites & supervise the planting stages of nursery stocks selection, installation & subsequent maintenance. They would usually work alongside with other landscape professionals like the landscape architects, nurserymen, contractors & especially environmentalists. Urban Foresters would help the City Council to draft up laws & regulations in protecting trees in the urban setting.
Management of the urban forest is a subject of its own in a lot of western countries. In the regular maintenance sector, Urban Foresters would be involved in producing Tree Inventory, & carry out regular Tree Inspection to categorize trees for further treatment. For newly planted Young Trees in landscape, regular Structural Pruning will be a necessity to develop good health & structure. Landscaping trees with good health & structure will be much less prone to wind failure & pest attack. While in Singapore, the Station Manager has learned that the National Parks Board (Nparks) of the Singapore Govt carries out regular Tree Inventory, Tree Inspection & Structural Pruning in their Greenery program. Next time when you are here, admire their trees & think of the work they have input into their trees. Good trees in urban setting just do not come naturally.
In western countries, Urban Forestry is usually administered by qualified arborists in their City Forestry Dept. The GIS system is a popular method to carry out Tree Inventory. Regular Tree Inspection & Structural Pruning are usually executed by Certified Arborists & Certified Tree Workers, & rarely by common gardeners who have not been trained in the subject. Trees are a specialist topic & have to be handled by tree specialists, or we may be getting something else rather than a tree at the end. If this is not convincing, look at Leung King Estate in Tuen Mun that the Station Manager is involved at present... Look at how trees were mutilated there, in the name of 'Pruning'.
It will be inappropriate for this Station to compare the image of Urban Forestry in HK with that of advanced western countries. The Station Manager has learned that our Govt Depts are actually working hard on improving our tree scenery but have considerations on priorities & resources. After all, Singapore has taken decades to come to their excellent state of tree affairs of today, & we do not even have a City Forestry Dept in HK. May we hope in the near future that our loving city of HK can also produce well grown trees as compared to Singapore & may Urban Forestry sometime take its position in our world class city of HK some day.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
At the Sep 06 CA Training by Arbor Global in Fung Kai School, the Station Manager was requested by two Station Members to write on two separate topics: Termites & Urban Forestry. Since Termites were then a more pressing topic, the 'Termite Talk' was quickly released in Station Mail in Oct 06. The Station Manager has not forgotten his pledge to write on Urban Forestry though. Now this is how an introduction of this immense topic is to be presented ....
The term of Urban Forestry seems to contradict itself. How can we call it a forest if it is situated in an urban area? Our normal understanding of Forestry would be those up in the hills with eco-system intertwined. The commercial interest of Forestry studies also seems to lie upon the economic value of wood for products. However, when we come to think of the trees in our parks, housing estates, roadside, community centres, institutes & other public places inhabited by population, it is not difficult to imagine that we do have a form of eco-system in our urban areas. Urban Forestry mainly intermingles with human activities, our city life.
Trees in our urban forest usually do not have the luxury of an ideal growing condition of the natural environment, but rather have to struggle for survival in an environment designed for human needs. For example, urban soil is usually depleted of organic matters & lacks microbial activities. Even if by adding in form of compost, once used up within a few months in our subtropical climate, topping up by natural process will be unlikely. Then there is the heat island effect, lack of growing space, drainage problem, wind gusts created by building structures & traffic, contamination by pollutants, human vandalism, incorrect planting practices & a whole range of other abuses to sustain. It is a miracle that our trees can survive in such hostile conditions at all ! Aren't trees forgiving??
Statistics in western countries showed that Street Trees usually have a Functional Life Span of only a few years. In 2004 in Los Angeles, some survey gave a result of only 7 years. Most of the roadside trees in HK would be regarded as an object for removal in terms of structure & health by international standards, & yet their retention seems to be a compromise between conservation & politics really. If our attitude towards trees comes any closer to that of the western countries, maybe at least half of our roadside trees will be a target of removal soon enough.
In countries practicing Urban Forestry, Urban Foresters will usually begin involvement at the planning stage of any development like providing Tree Survey, Arboricultural Assessment & Selection of Tree Species . Urban Foresters would generally report directly to the City Council & would be the second person on site after the Land Surveyor. They will decide upon which trees to retain, remove or transplant with their professional knowledge in accordance with the local laws. They are likely to advise on tree protection in construction sites & supervise the planting stages of nursery stocks selection, installation & subsequent maintenance. They would usually work alongside with other landscape professionals like the landscape architects, nurserymen, contractors & especially environmentalists. Urban Foresters would help the City Council to draft up laws & regulations in protecting trees in the urban setting.
Management of the urban forest is a subject of its own in a lot of western countries. In the regular maintenance sector, Urban Foresters would be involved in producing Tree Inventory, & carry out regular Tree Inspection to categorize trees for further treatment. For newly planted Young Trees in landscape, regular Structural Pruning will be a necessity to develop good health & structure. Landscaping trees with good health & structure will be much less prone to wind failure & pest attack. While in Singapore, the Station Manager has learned that the National Parks Board (Nparks) of the Singapore Govt carries out regular Tree Inventory, Tree Inspection & Structural Pruning in their Greenery program. Next time when you are here, admire their trees & think of the work they have input into their trees. Good trees in urban setting just do not come naturally.
In western countries, Urban Forestry is usually administered by qualified arborists in their City Forestry Dept. The GIS system is a popular method to carry out Tree Inventory. Regular Tree Inspection & Structural Pruning are usually executed by Certified Arborists & Certified Tree Workers, & rarely by common gardeners who have not been trained in the subject. Trees are a specialist topic & have to be handled by tree specialists, or we may be getting something else rather than a tree at the end. If this is not convincing, look at Leung King Estate in Tuen Mun that the Station Manager is involved at present... Look at how trees were mutilated there, in the name of 'Pruning'.
It will be inappropriate for this Station to compare the image of Urban Forestry in HK with that of advanced western countries. The Station Manager has learned that our Govt Depts are actually working hard on improving our tree scenery but have considerations on priorities & resources. After all, Singapore has taken decades to come to their excellent state of tree affairs of today, & we do not even have a City Forestry Dept in HK. May we hope in the near future that our loving city of HK can also produce well grown trees as compared to Singapore & may Urban Forestry sometime take its position in our world class city of HK some day.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Tree Planting to cool HK
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only. On the other hand, Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
The conversation by the Director of the HK Observatory Mr. Lam Chiu-ying yesterday to the media has given the HK people warning that we may lose the winter that we know of in 50 years' time, if we carry on the way we build our city. Some excerpts are given below for his comments:
1. 石屎森林 熱夜世紀末倍增http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070608/60/2951n.html
2. 50年後跟冬天說再見 樓宇日吸熱晚釋放 「熱夜」急增http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070608/12/294u7.html
There have been some talks on greening our roofs to cool the city recently. However, if we compare the surface area of the roof to absorb sunlight with the surface area of the vertical sides of any high rise building, greening roof alone is negligible in its cooling effect because :
1. The roof area is very small when compared to that of the vertical faces in any tall building.
2. The sun will shine from East to West everyday & will not stay vertically on the roof to be absorbed.
3. The vertical faces of a tall building will absorb, reflect & release heat as much as the roof, depending on the sun's angle.
Unless we green the vertical faces of our tall buildings as well, which is rather impractical, greening roofs alone would only be just another political show although better than doing nothing.
When Singapore became a country in the 1960's, their leaders have taken the foresight to cool their city by a massive Tree Planting Program. Singapore is situated at 3 degree North in Latitude & they have no winter. The sun is equally hard on them. Air conditioning in the 1960's was unpopular & expensive. Their political leaders then thought of planting trees to cover as much of the city area as possible to cool their interior. Urban planning & construction has taken Tree Planting as a priority, & trees have become an asset for the Singaporeans.
In Singapore's Greenery Program, Tree Planting is no doubt the backbone. Their designers have forsaken flowering as the most prominent factor in choosing species but rather go for canopy coverage. After all, flowering in most trees would stay on the perimeter of the canopy & maybe birds can see them better. On the other hand, the shade of the canopy will benefit the people below. The arrangement of shrubs & groundcovers would play only second fiddle in any Singapore landscape. Even so, Singapore has always been known internationally as the 'Garden City' in the past & now better known as a 'City in a Garden'. Singapore has achieved success indeed in their Greenery Program.
The Greenery Program in Singapore is led by the National Parks Board of the Singapore Govt (Nparks). Nparks has around 600 staff to look after their 1.3 million trees in the city, as compared to the around 730,000 trees by our LCSD of approx. 8,000 staff in HK, although not all LCSD staff are devoted to look after only trees like in Nparks. Nparks has been traditionally led by Foresters & now Arborists. They have now over 100 Certified Arborists working in their various Depts with only around 10 Landscape Architects to carry out design as a fact. Nparks also practises ISA arboriculture & their work can be browsed through in www.nparks.gov.sg .
If we are going to cool our city of HK to avoid losing winters, appropriate Tree Planting would seems to be a probable solution. We have seen our neighbours in Singapore who have more sun than ourselves done it with flying colours. Can we learn something from them & should we protect our environment by Tree Planting? If not, why are we different?
To look ahead a little further, should we set up an Arboricultural Office in our Govt to coordinate tree planting, maintenance & preservation? How & what kind of personnel should be leading it? Which international practices should we follow? What kind of qualified personnel should be allowed to do the Tree Inspection, Hazard Assessment, Structural Pruning, Felling Approval, Transplantation Assessment, Tree Climbing, Tree Selection & many others? What are their legal liabilities?
Should we respect & protect our trees in HK? Do we desire our trees to become an asset for HK rather than liabilities?
There are a lot of questions we can ask ourselves indeed.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
The conversation by the Director of the HK Observatory Mr. Lam Chiu-ying yesterday to the media has given the HK people warning that we may lose the winter that we know of in 50 years' time, if we carry on the way we build our city. Some excerpts are given below for his comments:
1. 石屎森林 熱夜世紀末倍增http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070608/60/2951n.html
2. 50年後跟冬天說再見 樓宇日吸熱晚釋放 「熱夜」急增http://hk.news.yahoo.com/070608/12/294u7.html
There have been some talks on greening our roofs to cool the city recently. However, if we compare the surface area of the roof to absorb sunlight with the surface area of the vertical sides of any high rise building, greening roof alone is negligible in its cooling effect because :
1. The roof area is very small when compared to that of the vertical faces in any tall building.
2. The sun will shine from East to West everyday & will not stay vertically on the roof to be absorbed.
3. The vertical faces of a tall building will absorb, reflect & release heat as much as the roof, depending on the sun's angle.
Unless we green the vertical faces of our tall buildings as well, which is rather impractical, greening roofs alone would only be just another political show although better than doing nothing.
When Singapore became a country in the 1960's, their leaders have taken the foresight to cool their city by a massive Tree Planting Program. Singapore is situated at 3 degree North in Latitude & they have no winter. The sun is equally hard on them. Air conditioning in the 1960's was unpopular & expensive. Their political leaders then thought of planting trees to cover as much of the city area as possible to cool their interior. Urban planning & construction has taken Tree Planting as a priority, & trees have become an asset for the Singaporeans.
In Singapore's Greenery Program, Tree Planting is no doubt the backbone. Their designers have forsaken flowering as the most prominent factor in choosing species but rather go for canopy coverage. After all, flowering in most trees would stay on the perimeter of the canopy & maybe birds can see them better. On the other hand, the shade of the canopy will benefit the people below. The arrangement of shrubs & groundcovers would play only second fiddle in any Singapore landscape. Even so, Singapore has always been known internationally as the 'Garden City' in the past & now better known as a 'City in a Garden'. Singapore has achieved success indeed in their Greenery Program.
The Greenery Program in Singapore is led by the National Parks Board of the Singapore Govt (Nparks). Nparks has around 600 staff to look after their 1.3 million trees in the city, as compared to the around 730,000 trees by our LCSD of approx. 8,000 staff in HK, although not all LCSD staff are devoted to look after only trees like in Nparks. Nparks has been traditionally led by Foresters & now Arborists. They have now over 100 Certified Arborists working in their various Depts with only around 10 Landscape Architects to carry out design as a fact. Nparks also practises ISA arboriculture & their work can be browsed through in www.nparks.gov.sg .
If we are going to cool our city of HK to avoid losing winters, appropriate Tree Planting would seems to be a probable solution. We have seen our neighbours in Singapore who have more sun than ourselves done it with flying colours. Can we learn something from them & should we protect our environment by Tree Planting? If not, why are we different?
To look ahead a little further, should we set up an Arboricultural Office in our Govt to coordinate tree planting, maintenance & preservation? How & what kind of personnel should be leading it? Which international practices should we follow? What kind of qualified personnel should be allowed to do the Tree Inspection, Hazard Assessment, Structural Pruning, Felling Approval, Transplantation Assessment, Tree Climbing, Tree Selection & many others? What are their legal liabilities?
Should we respect & protect our trees in HK? Do we desire our trees to become an asset for HK rather than liabilities?
There are a lot of questions we can ask ourselves indeed.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Tree Failures, Tree failures ....
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
Attached newspaper cuttings have shown multiple Tree Failures in different parts of HK in the past 2 weeks alone. This Station is convinced that not every Tree Failure would be detected by the media & it may be true that among our 9 Govt Depts touching trees that no single Dept can master all counts of Tree Failures within our territory, even though HK is a tiny dot on the map. Our Mature Trees have now become our time bombs gradually.
As said in previous Station Mail, if trees are not selected, installed, maintained & inspected properly & regularly, they would become more of a liability rather than an asset. Facts after facts have shown there is something wrong with our now Mature Trees. Yet Arborists in HK are just standing & watching, not be able to get much involved due to we play hardly any part in the current system. Somehow this Station wonders how our overseas partners would like to look upon us as ? Some kind of ???
While reading the newspaper cuttings for our Chinese readers, please kindly focus only on the underlined portions of the messages & disregard the commentary from the reporters. This Station does not have reporter of our own & has to extract information from the media for Tree Failures. This Station does not feel by penalizing anybody would help the situation & Prevention is always better than Cure. The general direction should be that to minimize the chance of accident in the first place, rather than laying the blame on the Depts for the aftermath.
Some of the commentary of the media have been very critical of the District Land Office (DLO) which would be regarded as unnecessary by this Station, simply because DLO are no experts on trees. DLO officers are not Arborist & how can they be relied upon to assess trees? Any assessment or recommendation on tree affairs would not be carried out by a Land Officer in Europe, America & Singapore. The Arboricultural Office there will be responsible for this kind of work. In HK, since we do not have an Arboricultural Office in equivalent to Western Nations, one immediate solution would be for DLO to employ or require Arborist Services to carry out assessment for tree work, such as recommendation for felling, transplanting & pruning. Only if an Arborist Report can be attached for such application, DLO can rather safely consider the outcome because Arborist Reports are legally sensitive. No good Arborist would like to write his/her report carelessly & put down his/her Certification no. He/She can be sued. The Station Manager has presented Arborist Reports in One Beacon Hill in Kowloon Tong & is doing it in Leung King Estate in Tuen Mun right now. It has been working so far so good. There are currently 41 Certified Arborists (CA) in HK & the number is increasing after every exam in April/October. This Station particularly recommends the employment of those CA in our CA Family (only 26 no.) due to their further training & special commitment in the CA Family.
The performance of our Mature Trees recently have been rather disappointing. They failed like dead flies. When they damaged properties or obstructed traffic, the public outcried. Something should be done with our Mature Trees before more failures would happen, like immediate inspection & hazard assessment. If we can not do them all immediately due to the vast numbers, we should at least make a start on the most obvious. Otherwise, we'll carry on to hear screams here & there...
This Station does not really know whether it is a good thing right now to have our trees maturing year after year in HK/China. Why do we have to enter into a state like this ??
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
Attached newspaper cuttings have shown multiple Tree Failures in different parts of HK in the past 2 weeks alone. This Station is convinced that not every Tree Failure would be detected by the media & it may be true that among our 9 Govt Depts touching trees that no single Dept can master all counts of Tree Failures within our territory, even though HK is a tiny dot on the map. Our Mature Trees have now become our time bombs gradually.
As said in previous Station Mail, if trees are not selected, installed, maintained & inspected properly & regularly, they would become more of a liability rather than an asset. Facts after facts have shown there is something wrong with our now Mature Trees. Yet Arborists in HK are just standing & watching, not be able to get much involved due to we play hardly any part in the current system. Somehow this Station wonders how our overseas partners would like to look upon us as ? Some kind of ???
While reading the newspaper cuttings for our Chinese readers, please kindly focus only on the underlined portions of the messages & disregard the commentary from the reporters. This Station does not have reporter of our own & has to extract information from the media for Tree Failures. This Station does not feel by penalizing anybody would help the situation & Prevention is always better than Cure. The general direction should be that to minimize the chance of accident in the first place, rather than laying the blame on the Depts for the aftermath.
Some of the commentary of the media have been very critical of the District Land Office (DLO) which would be regarded as unnecessary by this Station, simply because DLO are no experts on trees. DLO officers are not Arborist & how can they be relied upon to assess trees? Any assessment or recommendation on tree affairs would not be carried out by a Land Officer in Europe, America & Singapore. The Arboricultural Office there will be responsible for this kind of work. In HK, since we do not have an Arboricultural Office in equivalent to Western Nations, one immediate solution would be for DLO to employ or require Arborist Services to carry out assessment for tree work, such as recommendation for felling, transplanting & pruning. Only if an Arborist Report can be attached for such application, DLO can rather safely consider the outcome because Arborist Reports are legally sensitive. No good Arborist would like to write his/her report carelessly & put down his/her Certification no. He/She can be sued. The Station Manager has presented Arborist Reports in One Beacon Hill in Kowloon Tong & is doing it in Leung King Estate in Tuen Mun right now. It has been working so far so good. There are currently 41 Certified Arborists (CA) in HK & the number is increasing after every exam in April/October. This Station particularly recommends the employment of those CA in our CA Family (only 26 no.) due to their further training & special commitment in the CA Family.
The performance of our Mature Trees recently have been rather disappointing. They failed like dead flies. When they damaged properties or obstructed traffic, the public outcried. Something should be done with our Mature Trees before more failures would happen, like immediate inspection & hazard assessment. If we can not do them all immediately due to the vast numbers, we should at least make a start on the most obvious. Otherwise, we'll carry on to hear screams here & there...
This Station does not really know whether it is a good thing right now to have our trees maturing year after year in HK/China. Why do we have to enter into a state like this ??
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- Tree failures all over HK in June 07 during rain
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
Even before HK enters the typhoon season but only monsoon rain, trees are failing everywhere all over our territory day by day. Our trees have apparently become our liabilities rather than an asset when compared to our regional partners seemingly by fact these days.
Attached newspaper cuttings just showed some of the recent incidents reported by one of the newspapers. This Station actually received another report of a 1m diameter Ficus of over 10m height failed to lie across Queen's Road Central only this morning, seriously disrupting the traffic in the busiest commercial area of HK at the busiest time. The inconvenience & resentment of the public will be expressed in future open discussions among the activist groups & politicians, which may take the opportunity to demand for better tree care for our Mature Trees in HK.
In reality, ISA is not a political organization & in fact, ISA & our Station are both neutral in politics & unbiased in our comments towards anybody. ISA is an education & research entity. Our Station would only discuss the facts with our professional comments in arboriculture. Sometimes we would provide suggestions, but never put them strongly over any demand. It will be up to the relevant parties to make their own decisions. Our Station has received numerous complaints from our Station Members in the past to stand up strong in our position to demand this & that, but we have explained & declined every time due to our governed policies. We are simply not an activist group. It is our Integrity, Professionalism & Participation that make us do our work for the benefit of our society.
Mature Trees in HK nowadays seem to have become the time bombs in our city, particularly over the rainy & typhoon seasons. If no positive action is to be done over it, more tree failures may be anticipated in the near future. Our Station receives tree failure cases constantly from our Station Members & we do not have enough coverage to report them all. It may be up to a point that our public would become so fed up & say enough is enough, & what would happen after that? Our Station recommends the setting up of an Arboricultural Office in our Govt to coordinate Tree inspection, Tree Assessment, Structural Pruning, Tree Selection, Tree Planting, Tree Removal, Tree Preservation, Arbor Training & Community Campaign, etc. However, we only suggest but not demand. We are not in a position to demand anything. That is not our job.
HK may be getting a taste of her own medicine for not doing enough for tree care in the past. If the same would happen in Singapore today, would there be a court of several whipping?
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
Dear Station Members,
Even before HK enters the typhoon season but only monsoon rain, trees are failing everywhere all over our territory day by day. Our trees have apparently become our liabilities rather than an asset when compared to our regional partners seemingly by fact these days.
Attached newspaper cuttings just showed some of the recent incidents reported by one of the newspapers. This Station actually received another report of a 1m diameter Ficus of over 10m height failed to lie across Queen's Road Central only this morning, seriously disrupting the traffic in the busiest commercial area of HK at the busiest time. The inconvenience & resentment of the public will be expressed in future open discussions among the activist groups & politicians, which may take the opportunity to demand for better tree care for our Mature Trees in HK.
In reality, ISA is not a political organization & in fact, ISA & our Station are both neutral in politics & unbiased in our comments towards anybody. ISA is an education & research entity. Our Station would only discuss the facts with our professional comments in arboriculture. Sometimes we would provide suggestions, but never put them strongly over any demand. It will be up to the relevant parties to make their own decisions. Our Station has received numerous complaints from our Station Members in the past to stand up strong in our position to demand this & that, but we have explained & declined every time due to our governed policies. We are simply not an activist group. It is our Integrity, Professionalism & Participation that make us do our work for the benefit of our society.
Mature Trees in HK nowadays seem to have become the time bombs in our city, particularly over the rainy & typhoon seasons. If no positive action is to be done over it, more tree failures may be anticipated in the near future. Our Station receives tree failure cases constantly from our Station Members & we do not have enough coverage to report them all. It may be up to a point that our public would become so fed up & say enough is enough, & what would happen after that? Our Station recommends the setting up of an Arboricultural Office in our Govt to coordinate Tree inspection, Tree Assessment, Structural Pruning, Tree Selection, Tree Planting, Tree Removal, Tree Preservation, Arbor Training & Community Campaign, etc. However, we only suggest but not demand. We are not in a position to demand anything. That is not our job.
HK may be getting a taste of her own medicine for not doing enough for tree care in the past. If the same would happen in Singapore today, would there be a court of several whipping?
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
ISA HK/China --- DLO destroying trees in land sale?
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
Attached is a set of news complaint frequently appearing in Western countries decades ago & now appearing in HK for the past few years.
The District Lands Office (DLO) of the HK Govt was accused by environmental activists of destroying the Greenery of HK by selling land with forested trees.The activists worried that the trees would be cut down during the development progress so that 'Heat Island Effect' will be created. The activists also accused the Govt ignoring recommendations from the Planning Dept in their advice for development proposal. Various experts have suggested a more balanced ecological evaluation or establishing tree conservation laws to protect the forested trees. DLO's brief reply so stated was that the Lease Conditions of land sale have required the developers to submit application for 'tree felling' & 'compensatory planting proposal', & there were no 'valuable' trees requiring special attention at the various sites.
This Station has been asked to comment on events as such many times in the past by various parties, although the correspondences were never disclosed publicly as a Station policy.
HK is a small place & the Govt would view land sale as a major source of income to support quality Civil Services to the public. It is simple arithmetic that lower income would mean lower quality services anywhere in the free world. If by selling off a small piece of land which can generate enormous income with a small impact to our society, it would be considered by any common individual to be a good deal. Comparing to the daily removal of giant trees in many tropical forests in the world, the potential destruction of trees in any development in HK would be insignificant when it comes to any disturbance in ecology in a worldwide scale. However, if the forest to be disturbed would contain living species of special values or would contribute irrevocably for ecological havocs, the decision may be entirely reversed. It should be a balanced decision, not unilaterally biased, for the benefits of all.
To ascertain whether the forest would be of special significance in one way or another to our community, a team of foresters, arborists, environmentalists & other experts should be gathered to study the values & jointly produce a report on a scientific basis other than sentimental to answer the issue. For example, if the forest contains hazardous mature trees which would fall to hit people & properties in the coming storms, would anyone bear the responsibilities to retain them ?? If the trees there are so senile that the life expectancies are only for a few more years, would it not be better to remove them & plant new trees before development, rather than spending extra money & pain to remove them after everything is built ? What about letting the arborists review the so-called 'tree felling' & 'compensatory planting proposal' because arborists are tree care professionals ? There are lots of actions that can be considered, like what are practised in Western countries right now, for us to refer to in HK indeed.
Arborists are realistic Practitioners living in a realistic world. We are fact-finding & truth-telling with Integrity, Professionalism & Participation into our community. We base our judgement primarily on scientific ground from valid research more than anything else. Sentiment would not be the only consideration in our decision. Arborists can not be envisaged as a bunch of crying children stamping feet for toys.
Currently in our Govt system, DLO is the Dept to coordinate all tree affairs & represent the Govt for final decisions on tree matters involving Govt land . Only if DLO would employ or require Arborist Services to help them make decisions in any matter relating to tree affairs, they may save a lot time & effort to focus back on what they would do best in their job. It is not difficult for DLO to demand an Arborist Report to accompany any Tree felling, Transplantation & Pruning Application & let the arborists be the professionals to make recommendations & bear the risk. Being an honest professional, the Arborist will need to base their judgment on scientific ground & not commercial ground, because any foul play can be easily detected or confirmed by this Station at a telephone or e-mail request. This Station will be most happy to send out an experienced Arborist to provide a second opinion at the listed prices stated in the CA Family anytime, if ever needed. If our local experts are not even considered to be good enough for the enquiry, this Station can always arrange international experts of all kinds to come over for an inspection at a higher cost. Sky's the limit for our ISA's support. Our society should really have professionals working best for their own field, not crossing over to disturb social harmony.
Arborists in the West would do their job within their profession. Arborists there won't survey land for their DLO equivalent in advanced nations. Arborists in HK equally won't do the same thing either. Are tree affairs our DLO's interested expertise?
HK is indeed unique in some of our arrangement to show the world really ...
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
_________________________________________________________________
Dear Station Members,
Attached is a set of news complaint frequently appearing in Western countries decades ago & now appearing in HK for the past few years.
The District Lands Office (DLO) of the HK Govt was accused by environmental activists of destroying the Greenery of HK by selling land with forested trees.The activists worried that the trees would be cut down during the development progress so that 'Heat Island Effect' will be created. The activists also accused the Govt ignoring recommendations from the Planning Dept in their advice for development proposal. Various experts have suggested a more balanced ecological evaluation or establishing tree conservation laws to protect the forested trees. DLO's brief reply so stated was that the Lease Conditions of land sale have required the developers to submit application for 'tree felling' & 'compensatory planting proposal', & there were no 'valuable' trees requiring special attention at the various sites.
This Station has been asked to comment on events as such many times in the past by various parties, although the correspondences were never disclosed publicly as a Station policy.
HK is a small place & the Govt would view land sale as a major source of income to support quality Civil Services to the public. It is simple arithmetic that lower income would mean lower quality services anywhere in the free world. If by selling off a small piece of land which can generate enormous income with a small impact to our society, it would be considered by any common individual to be a good deal. Comparing to the daily removal of giant trees in many tropical forests in the world, the potential destruction of trees in any development in HK would be insignificant when it comes to any disturbance in ecology in a worldwide scale. However, if the forest to be disturbed would contain living species of special values or would contribute irrevocably for ecological havocs, the decision may be entirely reversed. It should be a balanced decision, not unilaterally biased, for the benefits of all.
To ascertain whether the forest would be of special significance in one way or another to our community, a team of foresters, arborists, environmentalists & other experts should be gathered to study the values & jointly produce a report on a scientific basis other than sentimental to answer the issue. For example, if the forest contains hazardous mature trees which would fall to hit people & properties in the coming storms, would anyone bear the responsibilities to retain them ?? If the trees there are so senile that the life expectancies are only for a few more years, would it not be better to remove them & plant new trees before development, rather than spending extra money & pain to remove them after everything is built ? What about letting the arborists review the so-called 'tree felling' & 'compensatory planting proposal' because arborists are tree care professionals ? There are lots of actions that can be considered, like what are practised in Western countries right now, for us to refer to in HK indeed.
Arborists are realistic Practitioners living in a realistic world. We are fact-finding & truth-telling with Integrity, Professionalism & Participation into our community. We base our judgement primarily on scientific ground from valid research more than anything else. Sentiment would not be the only consideration in our decision. Arborists can not be envisaged as a bunch of crying children stamping feet for toys.
Currently in our Govt system, DLO is the Dept to coordinate all tree affairs & represent the Govt for final decisions on tree matters involving Govt land . Only if DLO would employ or require Arborist Services to help them make decisions in any matter relating to tree affairs, they may save a lot time & effort to focus back on what they would do best in their job. It is not difficult for DLO to demand an Arborist Report to accompany any Tree felling, Transplantation & Pruning Application & let the arborists be the professionals to make recommendations & bear the risk. Being an honest professional, the Arborist will need to base their judgment on scientific ground & not commercial ground, because any foul play can be easily detected or confirmed by this Station at a telephone or e-mail request. This Station will be most happy to send out an experienced Arborist to provide a second opinion at the listed prices stated in the CA Family anytime, if ever needed. If our local experts are not even considered to be good enough for the enquiry, this Station can always arrange international experts of all kinds to come over for an inspection at a higher cost. Sky's the limit for our ISA's support. Our society should really have professionals working best for their own field, not crossing over to disturb social harmony.
Arborists in the West would do their job within their profession. Arborists there won't survey land for their DLO equivalent in advanced nations. Arborists in HK equally won't do the same thing either. Are tree affairs our DLO's interested expertise?
HK is indeed unique in some of our arrangement to show the world really ...
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
_________________________________________________________________
ISA HK/China --- Tree Climbing in a Construction Site
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only, but Station Mail has given up copyright & can be freely circulated. For administrative reasons, comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
Further to the Station Mail last Tuesday reporting on falling accidents involving height on working platforms, this Station has received vigorous comments from Station Members condemning the use of working platforms for arbor work. Our CA Family Member Mike Leung actually wrote to the Labour Dept a little a while ago to clarify the necessity of using working platform for working on trees. The Labour Dept gave him a reply on the subject & the various regulations are now attached for general reference.
Please note the paragraph in blue is the legal liability of the contractor on site to prevent any falling accident.
Please note the paragraphs in red are the design of the Fall Protection System.
Please note the paragraphs in green are the defence in Court for the used Fall Protection System.
It can be clearly seen from the regulations that the use of ropes & harness is the other means of support so mentioned in the regulations as long as all the components adopted are safe. How the world 'safe' is defined will be up to the Court Judges at the end. The Court Judges will need facts & international standards to reach a decision. Practicing Arborist testifying as Expert Witness with all the international standards & experience collected will be the strongest evidence to convince. If the opposite side is presenting a Labour Inspector or Safety Officer who has never climbed a tree nor familiar with the international practices/experience, the chance of winning for them in a HK Court will be extremely slim. HK still believes in the rule of law. Court Judges are supposed to be blind-folded with a scale on one hand & a sword on the other.
Now with regulations as weapon on hand, maybe our Station Member can use them for persuasion in the case that they are still required to use bamboo scaffolding or other working platforms to carry out arbor work. Only if HK can have more education in arboriculture among the public, such unfair requirement should never have happened in the first place. That's why our Station is now offering free Arbor Seminars to the public.
If anyone still has any difficulties with the same subject in future, please kindly contact this Station for help.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
___________________________________________________________________
Reply from Labour Dept on FIUO & OSHO Regulations in HK on 5.6.07 for Mike Leung, ISA CA of the CA Family of ISA HK/China Station
Our reference : (22) in DU/COR/PUB Pt.65 Dear Mr. LEUNG,
Thank you for your e-mail of 31 May 2007 enquiring the captioned subject.
The Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance (FIUO), Cap 59, the Occupational Safety and Health Ordinance (OSHO), Cap 509, and their subsidiaryregulations are the occupational safety and health legislation administered by this Department in Hong Kong.
Regarding the safety of working at height in connection with construction work, the statutory requirements are stipulated in the following regulations, which are not exhaustive:
(I) Regulation 38B of the Construction Sites (Safety) Regulations (CSSR) (Cap 59I) :-
(1) Subject to paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), the contractor responsible for any construction site shall take adequate steps to prevent any person on the sitefrom falling from a height of 2 metres or more.
(1A) Subject to paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), any contractor who has direct control over any construction work shall take adequate steps to prevent any person on any place where the construction work is being carried out from falling from a height of 2metres or more.
(2) For the purpose of paragraphs (1) and (1A), "adequate steps" shall include the provision, use and maintenance of one or more of the following-
(a) working platforms; (b) guard-rails, barriers, toe-boards and fences; (c) coverings for openings; (d) gangways and runs.(II) Regulation 38C of the CSSR:-
Where work cannot be safely done on or from the ground or from part of a permanent structure, the contractor responsible for the construction site concerned andany contractor who has direct control over the work shall provide, and ensure the use of, a scaffold, ladder or other means of support, all of which shall be safe for the purpose, having regard to the work to be done.
(III) Regulation 38D of the CSSR:-
The contractor responsible for any scaffold, ladder or other means of support referred to in regulation 38C and any contractor who has direct control over any work which involves the use of the scaffold, ladder, or other means of support shall ensure that it shall not be used unless it is-
(a) so designed and constructed that it does not collapse, overturn or move accidentally; (b) of suitable and sound materials of sufficient strength and capacity for the purpose for which it is to be used; and(c) properly maintained and every part thereof kept so securely supported or suspended as to ensure; so far as is reasonably practicable, that it is stable.
(IV) Regulation 38H of the CSSR:-
(1) It shall be a defence for a contractor charged with an offence under regulation 38B(1) or (1A) or 38C to show-
(a) that in all the circumstances of the case, it was impracticable to comply with all or any of the requirements of that regulation; (b) that- (i) the contractor provided suitable and adequate safety nets and safety belts in lieu of complying with those requirements; or (ii) in all the circumstances of the case, it was impracticable to provide such safety nets and the contractor provided suitable and adequate safety belts in lieu of complying with those requirements; and
(c) that all reasonably practicable steps were taken to ensure the proper use of the safety belts by the persons to whom they were provided.
(2) Safety nets shall not be considered as suitable and adequate for the purpose of paragraph (1) unless they are-
(a) of such design and so constructed; and (b) so erected, maintained and kept in such positions, as to be effective to protect persons carrying on at a height the work to which the nets relate, to protect persons using any access to or egress from the part of the construction site where that work is being done and to prevent as far as practicable injury to persons falling onto them.
(3) Safety belts shall not be considered as suitable and adequate for the purpose of paragraph (1) unless they-
(a) are attached continuously to a suitable and secure anchorage; (b) have suitable fittings therefore; and (c) are of such a design and so constructed and maintained as to prevent injury to persons using them in the event of a fall.
It follows that if the arboricultural work as mentioned in your e-mail belongs to construction work or is connected with construction work, the contractor responsible shall follow and comply with the statutory requirements prescribed by the abovementioned regulations. For the definition of construction work, you may refer to Section 2 of the FIUO.
Moreover, Section 6 of the OSHO and Section 6A of the FIUO prescribe, among others, the duties of a proprietor/employer/contractor to ensure the safety and health at work of his employees. The duties include the provision and maintenance of safe plant and systems of work to the person(s) employed.
You may view the full content of the aforementioned legislation in the website of the Department of Justice at http://www.justice.gov.hk/Home.htm.
If you have further enquiry on the matter, please feel free to contact me at 2975 6406.
Yours sincerely, (TANG Kai-yu)for Permanent Secretary for Economic Development andLabour (Labour)/ Commissioner for Labour"
Dear Station Members,
Further to the Station Mail last Tuesday reporting on falling accidents involving height on working platforms, this Station has received vigorous comments from Station Members condemning the use of working platforms for arbor work. Our CA Family Member Mike Leung actually wrote to the Labour Dept a little a while ago to clarify the necessity of using working platform for working on trees. The Labour Dept gave him a reply on the subject & the various regulations are now attached for general reference.
Please note the paragraph in blue is the legal liability of the contractor on site to prevent any falling accident.
Please note the paragraphs in red are the design of the Fall Protection System.
Please note the paragraphs in green are the defence in Court for the used Fall Protection System.
It can be clearly seen from the regulations that the use of ropes & harness is the other means of support so mentioned in the regulations as long as all the components adopted are safe. How the world 'safe' is defined will be up to the Court Judges at the end. The Court Judges will need facts & international standards to reach a decision. Practicing Arborist testifying as Expert Witness with all the international standards & experience collected will be the strongest evidence to convince. If the opposite side is presenting a Labour Inspector or Safety Officer who has never climbed a tree nor familiar with the international practices/experience, the chance of winning for them in a HK Court will be extremely slim. HK still believes in the rule of law. Court Judges are supposed to be blind-folded with a scale on one hand & a sword on the other.
Now with regulations as weapon on hand, maybe our Station Member can use them for persuasion in the case that they are still required to use bamboo scaffolding or other working platforms to carry out arbor work. Only if HK can have more education in arboriculture among the public, such unfair requirement should never have happened in the first place. That's why our Station is now offering free Arbor Seminars to the public.
If anyone still has any difficulties with the same subject in future, please kindly contact this Station for help.
best regards,
Sammy Au
Station Manager
___________________________________________________________________
Reply from Labour Dept on FIUO & OSHO Regulations in HK on 5.6.07 for Mike Leung, ISA CA of the CA Family of ISA HK/China Station
Our reference : (22) in DU/COR/PUB Pt.65 Dear Mr. LEUNG,
Thank you for your e-mail of 31 May 2007 enquiring the captioned subject.
The Factories and Industrial Undertakings Ordinance (FIUO), Cap 59, the Occupational Safety and Health Ordinance (OSHO), Cap 509, and their subsidiaryregulations are the occupational safety and health legislation administered by this Department in Hong Kong.
Regarding the safety of working at height in connection with construction work, the statutory requirements are stipulated in the following regulations, which are not exhaustive:
(I) Regulation 38B of the Construction Sites (Safety) Regulations (CSSR) (Cap 59I) :-
(1) Subject to paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), the contractor responsible for any construction site shall take adequate steps to prevent any person on the sitefrom falling from a height of 2 metres or more.
(1A) Subject to paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), any contractor who has direct control over any construction work shall take adequate steps to prevent any person on any place where the construction work is being carried out from falling from a height of 2metres or more.
(2) For the purpose of paragraphs (1) and (1A), "adequate steps" shall include the provision, use and maintenance of one or more of the following-
(a) working platforms; (b) guard-rails, barriers, toe-boards and fences; (c) coverings for openings; (d) gangways and runs.(II) Regulation 38C of the CSSR:-
Where work cannot be safely done on or from the ground or from part of a permanent structure, the contractor responsible for the construction site concerned andany contractor who has direct control over the work shall provide, and ensure the use of, a scaffold, ladder or other means of support, all of which shall be safe for the purpose, having regard to the work to be done.
(III) Regulation 38D of the CSSR:-
The contractor responsible for any scaffold, ladder or other means of support referred to in regulation 38C and any contractor who has direct control over any work which involves the use of the scaffold, ladder, or other means of support shall ensure that it shall not be used unless it is-
(a) so designed and constructed that it does not collapse, overturn or move accidentally; (b) of suitable and sound materials of sufficient strength and capacity for the purpose for which it is to be used; and(c) properly maintained and every part thereof kept so securely supported or suspended as to ensure; so far as is reasonably practicable, that it is stable.
(IV) Regulation 38H of the CSSR:-
(1) It shall be a defence for a contractor charged with an offence under regulation 38B(1) or (1A) or 38C to show-
(a) that in all the circumstances of the case, it was impracticable to comply with all or any of the requirements of that regulation; (b) that- (i) the contractor provided suitable and adequate safety nets and safety belts in lieu of complying with those requirements; or (ii) in all the circumstances of the case, it was impracticable to provide such safety nets and the contractor provided suitable and adequate safety belts in lieu of complying with those requirements; and
(c) that all reasonably practicable steps were taken to ensure the proper use of the safety belts by the persons to whom they were provided.
(2) Safety nets shall not be considered as suitable and adequate for the purpose of paragraph (1) unless they are-
(a) of such design and so constructed; and (b) so erected, maintained and kept in such positions, as to be effective to protect persons carrying on at a height the work to which the nets relate, to protect persons using any access to or egress from the part of the construction site where that work is being done and to prevent as far as practicable injury to persons falling onto them.
(3) Safety belts shall not be considered as suitable and adequate for the purpose of paragraph (1) unless they-
(a) are attached continuously to a suitable and secure anchorage; (b) have suitable fittings therefore; and (c) are of such a design and so constructed and maintained as to prevent injury to persons using them in the event of a fall.
It follows that if the arboricultural work as mentioned in your e-mail belongs to construction work or is connected with construction work, the contractor responsible shall follow and comply with the statutory requirements prescribed by the abovementioned regulations. For the definition of construction work, you may refer to Section 2 of the FIUO.
Moreover, Section 6 of the OSHO and Section 6A of the FIUO prescribe, among others, the duties of a proprietor/employer/contractor to ensure the safety and health at work of his employees. The duties include the provision and maintenance of safe plant and systems of work to the person(s) employed.
You may view the full content of the aforementioned legislation in the website of the Department of Justice at http://www.justice.gov.hk/Home.htm.
If you have further enquiry on the matter, please feel free to contact me at 2975 6406.
Yours sincerely, (TANG Kai-yu)for Permanent Secretary for Economic Development andLabour (Labour)/ Commissioner for Labour"
ISA HK/China --- Free Arbor seminars to the public
*** Station Mail is for the information of Station Members only. Comments from outsiders are usually not entertained & may be circulated within our system locally & overseas.***
Dear Station Members,
Our Station Motto is Integrity, Professionalism & Participation.
Whereas Integrity & Professionalism are for the credibility & conduct of our Station CA especially those from the CA Family, Participation is meant for Station Members to join Station activities so that our Station remains active instead of dormant, & also for our Station to join the public at large to let them feel Arborists are part of the community. The last thing that the CA Family would like to be known is a village of noble people living high up in the clouds & laughing at the world below. Not all Station CA's are in the CA Family. There is a certain criteria to join this prestigious group. At present, only around 65% of Station CA are in the CA Family.
It has been demonstrated time after time in past that our public would desire Arbor education. Every Tree Supervision Class of the Station Manager in CITA ended up with thundering applause. This Station has been interviewed many times by the media & continues to receive phone calls on Arbor matters from public individuals. There is a genuine need to promote Arbor knowledge in HK/China as a public need.
On the other hand, various newspapers have given counts of public complaint about tree malpractice constantly. Nearly every time, the tree owners would find an educated excuse to defend their wilful act. Then the complaint would be dissolved & the same act would repeat next time only to be met with another intelligent answer. The public are rarely winning.
Why can't the public win? They simple answer is that they do not know enough about trees. They are not Arborists & have not been trained specially for tree care. When replied, they would not know what the next question should be. Many a times when puzzled, they do not know where to go for help. Most of them have never heard of the existence of ISA either.
If our Station believes in Participation, we should offer help. Offering help will cost us time but we are supposed to believe in Participation. If we do not live up our word, then we are infringing Integrity. If our answer does not comply with our practice, then we offend Professionalism. We would then become a bag of hot air & lose the respect we deserve.
Therefore, we have to do something to maintain our credibility. Arborists are Practitioners & we materialize our word. After discussion with the CA Family, this Station has decided to provide free seminars in Chinese or English in basic Arbor education to the public. The initial sessions would be those described below with each lasting around one hour each in :
1. Basic ISA Tree Standards --- What are the international requirements for a quality landscape tree? How should it be grown & what are the inspection procedures? In short, how should a good tree look like?
2. Basic ISA Tree Planting --- What are the requirements for tree & ground before planting? How & when should we plant or transplant a tree? What are the requirements for backfill, wound protection, fertilizing & staking in accordance with international practices?
3. Basic ISA Tree Pruning --- Why do we prune? What are the objectives for pruning? What are the pruning techniques in accordance with international practices? Are young trees & mature trees pruned the same way & why, if different? ? What are the harms of Topping? What is Structural Pruning & how is it used in landscape trees?
This Station has already prepared power points for the 3 topics above. The speaker will be a volunteer CA from the CA Family. Other topics can be prepared when needed in future.
The free seminar will be given to any group of over 25 persons in a class upon request at a time & location convenient to the CA Family speaker. Our target groups include Political Parties (any discipline), Religious Groups (any faith), Student Unions, Teachers Unions, Press Unions, Social Workers Unions, Civil Servants Unions, Labour Unions, Trade Unions, etc. This Station will approach them one by one to offer our service.
On the other hand, if any Station Member can gather a group of over 25 persons, he/she will be welcomed to contact this Station for any of the above seminars. Please kindly note the organizer will need to provide an air-con room with projector & screen for the presentation, at a time & location convenient to the CA Family speaker.
Participation is the commitment of the CA Family to serve our society. It will also bring close the Arborist Profession to the public at large. Our service is in every way beneficial to the society of HK/China & our Station.
Please propagate this message to friends & neighbours at will. You may want to print out this message as a record for future reference. This is the least this Station can do to serve our society with no funding & limited resources at our disposal.
The CA Family looks forward to anybody's invitation anytime from now.
best regards,
Sammy Au
ISA HK/China Station Manager
ISA Chief Proctor for the HK/China Region
ISA Certified Arborist / Certified Tree Climber no. ML-0174AT
Lecturer of Tree Supervision at CITA
Dear Station Members,
Our Station Motto is Integrity, Professionalism & Participation.
Whereas Integrity & Professionalism are for the credibility & conduct of our Station CA especially those from the CA Family, Participation is meant for Station Members to join Station activities so that our Station remains active instead of dormant, & also for our Station to join the public at large to let them feel Arborists are part of the community. The last thing that the CA Family would like to be known is a village of noble people living high up in the clouds & laughing at the world below. Not all Station CA's are in the CA Family. There is a certain criteria to join this prestigious group. At present, only around 65% of Station CA are in the CA Family.
It has been demonstrated time after time in past that our public would desire Arbor education. Every Tree Supervision Class of the Station Manager in CITA ended up with thundering applause. This Station has been interviewed many times by the media & continues to receive phone calls on Arbor matters from public individuals. There is a genuine need to promote Arbor knowledge in HK/China as a public need.
On the other hand, various newspapers have given counts of public complaint about tree malpractice constantly. Nearly every time, the tree owners would find an educated excuse to defend their wilful act. Then the complaint would be dissolved & the same act would repeat next time only to be met with another intelligent answer. The public are rarely winning.
Why can't the public win? They simple answer is that they do not know enough about trees. They are not Arborists & have not been trained specially for tree care. When replied, they would not know what the next question should be. Many a times when puzzled, they do not know where to go for help. Most of them have never heard of the existence of ISA either.
If our Station believes in Participation, we should offer help. Offering help will cost us time but we are supposed to believe in Participation. If we do not live up our word, then we are infringing Integrity. If our answer does not comply with our practice, then we offend Professionalism. We would then become a bag of hot air & lose the respect we deserve.
Therefore, we have to do something to maintain our credibility. Arborists are Practitioners & we materialize our word. After discussion with the CA Family, this Station has decided to provide free seminars in Chinese or English in basic Arbor education to the public. The initial sessions would be those described below with each lasting around one hour each in :
1. Basic ISA Tree Standards --- What are the international requirements for a quality landscape tree? How should it be grown & what are the inspection procedures? In short, how should a good tree look like?
2. Basic ISA Tree Planting --- What are the requirements for tree & ground before planting? How & when should we plant or transplant a tree? What are the requirements for backfill, wound protection, fertilizing & staking in accordance with international practices?
3. Basic ISA Tree Pruning --- Why do we prune? What are the objectives for pruning? What are the pruning techniques in accordance with international practices? Are young trees & mature trees pruned the same way & why, if different? ? What are the harms of Topping? What is Structural Pruning & how is it used in landscape trees?
This Station has already prepared power points for the 3 topics above. The speaker will be a volunteer CA from the CA Family. Other topics can be prepared when needed in future.
The free seminar will be given to any group of over 25 persons in a class upon request at a time & location convenient to the CA Family speaker. Our target groups include Political Parties (any discipline), Religious Groups (any faith), Student Unions, Teachers Unions, Press Unions, Social Workers Unions, Civil Servants Unions, Labour Unions, Trade Unions, etc. This Station will approach them one by one to offer our service.
On the other hand, if any Station Member can gather a group of over 25 persons, he/she will be welcomed to contact this Station for any of the above seminars. Please kindly note the organizer will need to provide an air-con room with projector & screen for the presentation, at a time & location convenient to the CA Family speaker.
Participation is the commitment of the CA Family to serve our society. It will also bring close the Arborist Profession to the public at large. Our service is in every way beneficial to the society of HK/China & our Station.
Please propagate this message to friends & neighbours at will. You may want to print out this message as a record for future reference. This is the least this Station can do to serve our society with no funding & limited resources at our disposal.
The CA Family looks forward to anybody's invitation anytime from now.
best regards,
Sammy Au
ISA HK/China Station Manager
ISA Chief Proctor for the HK/China Region
ISA Certified Arborist / Certified Tree Climber no. ML-0174AT
Lecturer of Tree Supervision at CITA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
