And now in THIS corner……GIS takes another stab at lowering the bar II (Not click bait…)
Because this is playing out across the national discussion and view point of the GIS community,I wanted to include it here, cleaned up for content only, removing the peoples names and addresses etc as they aren’t relevant. The message is the GIS community and the way they perceive the Surveying Boards, and the profession in general. I don’t believe this is political, but if no one else is participating, and at least not listening to the outside opinions of this field, then we are doomed to whatever complacent results occur. To be sure, this is the 1600 people whom participate in the GISP online forum that I also belong to, and read and peruse as it is still an area I work in within my weird job duties. Take it for what it is.
The _____ Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) has been monitoring state legislation for amendments to land surveying licensing laws that broaden them to include tasks and functions that we and other professionals are able to perform with the newer technology. This does not mean that traditional functions like establishing or retracing property boundaries to establish their exact, legal location doesn’t still require a state licensed surveyor. It does not matter how accurate your GPS is. But some states have looked to expand virtually any operation that involves establishing location, no matter the purpose, to be land surveying and therefore require a license. Many states now, or are trying to, include photogrammetry and remote sensing under the definition or surveying.
For example, if you wanted to capture the location of fire hydrants or water meters that would have to be done under the supervision of a licensed surveyor according to some of these expanded definitions. Some would even extend to locating trees.
One bill we are following in Pennsylvania, HB 609 is the third iteration of legislation in that state that is in reaction to a lawsuit against the licensing board who took action against a company doing facility inventory for a power company as part of their asset management program. The way HB 609 is written that work could be interpreted as requiring a licensed surveyor.
To be clear, there are functions that are the domain of licensed surveyors and we aren’t trying to erode or invade that. What we are concerned about is a state extending its licensing requirements into areas where that isn’t required and impacts GIS professionals. For a discussion of professional boundaries see the URISA white paper.
____________________________________
***
Thanks for your attention to this important issue, G____, and for this update, and for the reminder about the White Paper.
***
___________________
It’s heartbreaking that this issue persists after nearly 30 years. Surveying and GIS are allied professions, with separate and valued skills sets. Surveyors are skilled in determining legal boundaries and points and GISPs are skilled in compiling those boundaries and points with other, referential, data to analyze and visualize data relations. It’s simple, yet some insist on making it difficult.
**
___________________________
I sure do agree with her.
________________________________
**
Agree 100%. This issue seems to persist for reasons I’ve never understood and recall discussing with my GIS students as far back as the late ’90s. As you note, GIS Professionals and Surveyors are working in complementary disciplines that in many cases, particularly for legal boundaries, rely on and support each other.
Nonetheless, the issue continues to pop up from time to time as some sort of power grab or protecting of turf that is wholly unnecessary in my opinion.I think the real question is, what is to be done about it? 30 years is a long time to be debating and (sometimes) fighting about this between professions when in fact we are doing quite well in the vast majority of contexts where the survey and GIS communities work together quite effectively. It seems there’s just a small, and vocal minority that insists on continuing to proposes policies and legislation to protect their turf every once in a while.
Education is a big part of it, but curious what else we can/should be doing (collectively) as professionals in these disciplines to move past it.
Log in to reply.