What is your opinion of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)?

Answer: Neutral
Explanation: While I remain neutral in terms of personal feelings toward the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), I do have some valid concerns based on direct observation and experience in the industry. One of my key issues is that the ISA tends to emphasize formal certification processes and fee collection, often at the expense of recognizing true field experience and practical knowledge. I’ve seen highly capable, experienced arborists go unrecognized simply because they lack the formal ISA certification—despite having decades of hands-on work, safety training, and deep knowledge of tree biology and management. On the other hand, I’ve also witnessed individuals receive ISA certification despite lacking the foundational experience and practical understanding necessary to operate competently in the field. This raises concerns about the consistency and depth of the evaluation process, and whether the credential truly reflects the skills required to be a reliable, knowledgeable arborist. While the ISA does provide a standardized framework and promotes ongoing education—both of which are positive goals—it often falls short when it comes to validating the contributions and capabilities of long-time professionals in the field. In practice, it can sometimes feel more like a pay-to-play system rather than a balanced, merit-based organization.

Answer: Favorable
Explanation: Well educated on trees

Answer: Not sure/never heard of them
Explanation: Not sure

Answer: Favorable
Explanation: Knowledge is power that's why we're certified with skills to get the job completed

Answer: Favorable
Explanation: Member

Answer: Favorable
Explanation: As a member, I am very happy with the amount of training and certification they offer.

Answer: Favorable
Explanation: Yes

Answer: Neutral
Explanation: they are ok

Answer: Favorable
Explanation: ISA provides education on all sorts of Arbornomics.