About
ISA

Consumer
Tree Care
Website

Publications

Certification
Information

Chapters & Professional
Affiliations

Discussion
Groups

Members
Only

Related
Links

Media
Source

Back to Arborist News Menu

I was stopped in the hall at an ISA chapter meeting recently by a fellow who wanted to know why ISA does not enforce standards of practice. This gentleman was a Certified Arborist and was angry and frustrated that a Certified Arborist in his area was doing substandard work. Another arborist joined in the conversation with the suggestion that state licensing laws were the solution. Yet a third arborist, who proudly boasted a degree in horticulture, felt that a college degree should be a prerequisite for becoming certified.

All of these arborists had the same objective in mind--a high standard of practice in arboriculture--but each had a different approach to how to achieve it.

I have fielded the same questions many times, and ISA's certification board has given deep and thorough consideration to these proposals. Let's take a look at each concept one at a time. I'll address them in reverse order, beginning with eligibility to take the certification exam.

Just as we have standards of practice in arboriculture, there are standards and guidelines for certification programs. These standards are, in some cases, promulgated by the U.S. Department of Justice or Federal Trade Commission in adherence to antitrust legislation to prevent restraint of trade, or they may be in the form of guidelines set forth by the National Organization for Competency Assurance.

Certification criteria should be no more stringent than is necessary to ensure that the required level of competence has been attained. The criteria must not have the purpose or effect of boycotting or restricting competitors. In short, eligibility requirements must be measurable and defensible as a prerequisite for practice in the field. Thus, if a program institutes a requirement for a college degree, the administering body must be able to demonstrate that an individual cannot gain the required knowledge and/or skill through means other than the degree. In fact, this type of eligibility requirement is the most commonly challenged (and thrown out) in courts. ISA's certification board decided, and wisely so, that there are many mechanisms for learning arboriculture and that there are many good arborists who do not hold a college degree.

What about legislation to create licensing of arborists? A few states have enacted such legislation, and others are considering it. But there have been problems in this arena as well. First, the trend in government is away from professional licensing except in professions in which public health is directly affected. A case can be made that arborists can directly endanger public lives in the work that they do, but states have often found the link is not direct enough, focusing instead on medical and health care professions.

Second, a number of the state licensing programs that were established have been allowed to sunset. Why? Insufficient funding for enforcement. And, in fact, without enforcement, these laws often have proven punitive to the "good guys." Some companies have gone to the trouble to meet the licensing requirements and pay the required fees, only to watch other companies disregard the law with impunity. That's not to say that licensing is inherently bad--I know of one state program that has been effective, but it seems to be the exception. As president-elect Bob Tate often says, it is difficult to legislate your way out of a problem.

Should ISA enforce standards of practice for the 16,000 Certified Arborists? ISA could institute a policing and enforcement program, but let's consider the ramifications of that option. The costs of investigating complaints, allowing due process for the offending parties, instituting an appeals process, incurring significant legal fees, and paying a much higher insurance premium would be exorbitant. And, litigation of a single lawsuit in which someone claims ISA has effectively prevented them from earning a living (some contracts require a Certified Arborist) could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. To cover these expenses and fees, and the additional ISA staff required, certification fees would have to be raised by several hundred dollars per year. Some Certified Arborists would feel that the expense is worth it, but many would not, and the recertification percentage would drop dramatically. With the expense borne by fewer Certified Arborists, the cost would likely be raised even higher.

ISA arborist certification is a voluntary program that is designed to improve technical competency of personnel in the tree care profession and to create incentives to improve professional development. It is essentially an educational program. The goal is to educate professionals about tree biology and the best practices in arboriculture, to reinforce those concepts through testing, and to provide the knowledge required for the professional arborist to educate consumers. I believe that the vast majority of Certified Arborists are committed to providing high standards of tree care. And, although there will always be some who perform substandard work, perhaps that is more an ethical problem than an arboricultural one.

Arborist certification has made a profound difference in the profession in the past decade or so. It has reached out to tens of thousands of arborists and provided an incentive for learning the fundamental principles about trees and their care. It has encouraged continued education and has been the impetus for the development of dozens of books, videos, CDs, and other educational materials. It has dramatically increased attendance at educational seminars and workshops. It has helped drive the development of standards of practice and encouraged adherence to them. It has created a network of educated arborists that has increased public awareness about tree care. It has even brought the title of arborist into the vocabulary of many home owners.

We still have a long way to go before "arborist" becomes a household word. But I can see the day when almost all tree care providers understand enough about trees to explain the harm in flush cuts, topping, lion tailing, volcano mulching, and a host of other poor practices that still plague our industry today. I can see the day when our educational network is big enough and fast enough to keep professionals up to date with the latest information in plant health care. I can see the day when the public understands that trees need care and arborists are the people who care for trees. I believe we are headed in the right direction, and education is the path that will get us there.