But I don't think the end of ash die back will be the end of them. These will be pushed into every sector of arb in the name of health and safety. I would be surprised if in a few years if you see climbers on commercial jobs. They will be left to thee smallest of domestic work and jobs where their is no access for anything mechanical. Be it grapple saw or mewp.
Rightly in many respects. They're excellent tools that should be used more. I chastised a client the other day for sending me up a slog of a climb when there was access for a crane/grapple saw. As it worked out, I did it cheaper than a crane but that's only because I'm a better than average climber. If I'd taken a second day or broken something, it would have been cheaper to get a crane in from the start. People should never be forced though. Let the market sort it out.
Worth noting the most successful grapple saw setups have been created by lads that already climb.
Yes. Tree people get trees. Construction machine operators looking to diversify should tread carefully. I would never presume to tell a man he can't do something but a tree man operating a machine will generally be better than a machine man operating on trees. Weight, balance, snappiness, deadness etc.
Think about it, the majority of climbed trees are ones well above the safe size of a average grapple saw to cut.
No. Trees that get climbed are inaccessible or uneconomical for cranes. Size doesn't come into it. You can always crane/grapple it down in smaller pieces. Once the small diameter stuff has gone, the head comes off, the chains go on and a climber cuts for the bare hiab.
The ones to big for the grapple saws will be be accessed by mewps. And I'm not saying climbers will disappear. It will just have to be strongly justified. As with the steeplejack. It will become the reserve option. For when other routes are not possible. It's already like that in Germany. They will use every option before climbing. And sadly the opinions of climbers themselves will not matter as they won't making the rules. I highly doubt they will even be allowed to argue the case. It will be like so many other things where the change will be driven by people in suits. And yes at some point it might go wrong when someone takes to big a cut. But that is nice accident from the point of view hse. It's someone's fault. Blame can easily be placed on the operator a statement can be issued telling everyone to not over do it, all rapped up by lunchtime. If a climber falls out a tree due to a branch snapping that's a bad accident as how do you place a blame? It's much harder to form any kind of conclusion.
As said. Everything will eventually have to be mechanised where possible, not necessarily by grapple saw. Mewps will be perfectly legitimate to use. And the change will be driven by men in suits.
There are far to many big arb firms running this kit now for it to be ignored. It will start with commercial work and filter down.
It's not going to be instant but it will inevitably happen, purely on a box ticking excercise.
If the hierarchy you describe with MEWPs, cranes etc tallied with life on the ground, it would already be that way. Great MEWPs and cranes have been out there for years not being used for trees. The Arb Association flowchart for whether you should use a MEWP has been happily ignored for years. Tree firms like what they know (ropes etc) and are extremely careful spenders on 'unnecessary' plant.
Visitors to the APF just gone will no doubt have noticed the yellow crane tree dismantling demonstration. The charlatan Welsh cvnt in charge of it is luckily a grimy arb type at heart, not an effective suit, and is luckily incapable of doing the serious harm to the industry that he wants to (via the s**t training course he had the British taxvictim pay him to develop). I totally get your cynicism but I think it's a way off yet.