Round two(Not Click Bait) And now in THIS corner……GIS takes another stab at lowering the bar III
AS the spring is unfolding, there are more posts and discssions and meeting brewing about this issue.
One Poignant and prescient concept that NO ONE in GIS is discussing is that ANYONE, ANYONE can practice or work in GIS, ascend the ladder of position names(often self appointed or derived), and eventually if so inclined(much more recently too for pay increases and job justification) attain the GISP. And there is no required continuing education like any other licensed profession, because its not licensed. Go Figure.
Only people that trained under the legal required pathway, with validated and confirmed experience and a few fairly intense exams, and competency and continuing education, can be licensed as Surveyors.
Anyway, here is more grist for the speeding mill wheel. I support both sides, as I work in both sides. I anticipate this will be a hot topic for a while, and needs to be addressed in the forums we all particpate within, so take it as you see it.
And for attribution, I am a Member of URISA, and this is a collection of the email Listserve messages we all receive daily and hourly sometimes.
Enjoy:
___________________________________________________
We have all gone over this territory a lot in the past. We think about this too much as a ‘turf’ issue when it is really a choice issue. Surveyors have clearly set up a turf war by attempting to define their practice and profession too broadly.
I’m not a licensed surveyor. I don’t have a license to practice law or medicine. But, I have used surveyors, lawyers and doctors in my personal life, when it was my choice. Sometimes lawyers give advice which we choose to ignore. Sometimes doctors give advice which we choose to ignore. Sometimes before I consult a doctor or lawyer, I consult a friend or family member for advice. Should I never ask my wife ‘Honey, my back hurts. What do you think I should do about it?’ Should I never ask my brother ‘my employer has violated my contract. What do you think I should do about it?’ In many cases it is our choice to use a surveyor or not. I had a tree blow over in a storm on my property which landed on my roof. No damage except a bent gutter. I thought the tree was right on the property line. But maybe it was on my neighbors side of the property line. Maybe not. I could have hired a surveyor to make the determination, but that would be silly. I cut the tree down myself and repaired the gutter, and my neighbor gave me some beers.
I own my own house. My title deed includes a property map and legal description. Neither I nor my mortgage lender asked a surveyor to certify it. Of course title insurance is cheaper than hiring a surveyor. My choice, my lenders choice. Now before I bought my last two homes I hired a licensed engineer to do my home inspection. I could have accepted the sellers inspection report, but the cost of an inspection by my own licensed professional provided me with real value and protection that I chose.
Let’s look at the case of trying to determine if a hydrant is within 500 feet of a school. Who wants to know and why? Maybe the school principal has an administrative obligation to ensure that there is at least one hydrant within 500 feet of the school. The school has a couple options – consult GIS to reasonably determine if a hydrant is within 500 feet, or hire a surveyor. If they hire a surveyor, what is the scope of work? Is it to determine – yes/no – if a given hydrant is within 500 feet? or is it to measure precisely how far a given hydrant if from the school? And how did the school determine which hydrant to measure? If the school principal made an assessment that a given hydrant is the closest to the school based on visual observation is he/she practicing surveying? In reality, the school principal and administration should be able to make a reason judgement if they need a surveyor to answer the question or if visual observation or consulting a GIS is sufficient. The only value that a survey could provide in this case is to know precisely how far a given hydrant is from the school.
In King County we in GIS create official boundary maps and legal descriptions all the time. Within the next seven or eight months, across the United States, some of the most important boundary maps will be created without surveyors – political district maps with 2020 census data. In Washington the survey community has been quite for several years. The last flurry was in 2015 – at which point I authored a letter to the board of licensing that was signed by 10 Washington State Public Agencies. Read about this case and the letter here:
https://waurisa.org/resources/Documents/TheSummit/TheSummit_Issue39_2015_Summer.pdf
beginning at p. 3. Interestingly, the Board never responded to the letter, even though legally required to do so.
______________________________
I specifically included this link as an example of how much this is a SIDE issue for them, the article on the Bees, and other stuff were all congruent pages, where as this specific article is spread throughout nd difficult to follow, which i found ironic to say the least(jitterboogie)
_____________________________
——————————————-
Subject: State Land Surveying Laws Impacting GIS Professionals
Certainly, surveyor advocates in some states are over-reaching their legitimate licensure mandate, and are trying to enter the “GIS lane.” But, some GIS professionals are also reaching into the licensed surveyor lane. Specifically, when a GIS pro, or a photogrammetrist captures the location of “fixed works” (e.g., anything that has been built by humans), maps it, and then that locational data becomes the authoritative location for the fixed work (could be a manhole, or a fire hydrant; could not be a tree), then that GIS pro is practicing survey without a license.
Now, we’ve had innumerable arguments about the meaning of “authoritative,” even though the generally understood definition is sufficiently precise. That’s a smokescreen for not recognizing what is the domain of surveyors. GIS pros can map hydrants for any other purpose except if the resulting data or document is the one used to determine the authoritative location of the hydrant. Map diagram to manage the maintenance of hydrants? No problem. Fire run maps to show which corner of a block the firefighter needs to look for the hydrant? No problem. Measurement to determine whether there is a fire hydrant within 500 feet of a school (assuming the law requires that as a maximum distance)? Yes, it must be done under the supervision of a licensed surveyor.
To summarize, as detailed in the URISA White Paper (“Boundaries of Professional Practice”), if the location is being mapped from original measurements AND it is being used as the authoritative determination of location by a governmental agency, then the mapping should be supervised by a licensed surveyor. Any subsequent maps that are derived from the original documents, are referential and fully in the domain of GIS pros.
Obviously, some GIS pros who are doing this kind of original mapping will be unhappy.
In this forum, there are calls for “opening a dialog” with surveyor organizations about this topic.
Please note that the current NCEES Model Rules are the result of such a dialog, in which GIS professionals got far more than what the surveyors were willing to concede to GIS. As licensed professionals, ostensibly protecting the “health, safety and welfare” of the public, they had, and have, far more political power than do GIS pros. If we insist on squeezing into their lane (because today’s technology makes it easy to do so), there will be far more state legislative bills that we will have to try to fight._____________________________________
Subject: RE: State Land Surveying Laws Impacting GIS Professionals
We should also be mindful of the practical impacts whether or not they are illegal. If people like realtors, who in the past have used surveyors to sketch out property boundaries to use in presentations as opposed to recording the boundaries, now begin to use cheaper non surveyors for that same purpose that is a loss of business to surveyors. So you can see why surveyors might want to restrict that activity even if it is done legally with the proper caveats. I’m not saying that justifies their actions just that it’s a human reaction.
In response to Bruce’s discussion of “authoritative”, the state, by virtue of requiring certain levels or education and experience to be granted a license, has given surveyors a legal standing to issue opinions about property boundaries and to perform engineering related surveys. In that context they establish the “authoritative” coordinates even though separate surveys can disagree. And I also note, as Bruce has acknowledged, the NCEES Model Rules does not define “authoritative” as they couldn’t agree on a precise definition. Unfortunately but understandably, “authoritative” is being used in similar but unrelated contexts that muddy its use in surveying.
——————————
Here is a current article (published today, May 5) in GPS World, looking at this issue from a surveyor’s point of view. (I excerpted a few sentences)
Surveyors, not the tools, define the profession
May 5, 2021 – By Tim Burch
http://www.gpsworld.com/...
The evolution of technology and associated tools may help improve the profession, but it will not replace the knowledge necessary to be considered a true professional. …
These tools and associated software are much advanced compared to their earlier surveying instrument counterparts, but through extensive programming and easy-to-use interfaces, this equipment may seem simple to use to the layperson. … The knowledge to operate these instruments is user-friendly and intuitive. So what happens when the technology is used by someone who is not a surveyor? …
A UAV operator in North Carolina has filed suit against the NC Board of Examiners for Engineers and Surveyors. The board previously ordered the operator to discontinue his UAV flights that engaged in mapping, surveying and photogrammetry services. The operator had been providing images to realtors and homeowners that depicted graphical lines representing property lines, but also included a disclaimer that the product was not intended for surveying purposes. The board ruled he was surveying without a license. The operator is now suing the board and accusing them of violating his First Amendment rights of free speech. …
Many instances of low-budget outfits and even fence installers have been brought before state licensing boards because they misrepresented surveying services.______________________________
Years ago, we (the city property mapping office) began creating maps for the police department showing the location of a drug arrest in relation to a school. If it was within a certain distance, the penalties for the crime were more severe. They turned out to be very successful. At one point, because the maps were used in court, I advised the police that they might ought to use a surveyor since this was used in court. They decided to continue with us and the documents were never questioned in court. Were we practicing surveying without a license?
Police regularly use total stations and survey techniques to collect very accurate “authoritative” data describing crime scenes, particularly vehicle crashes. Are they practicing surveying without a license?——————————
As demonstrated by all of the above, laws are in place in every state to address the rare situation when professional boundaries are crossed. Additional licensing and regulation is unnecessary and impairs our ability to practice our profession.Again, it’s simple but some insist on making it complicated –
——————————————-
Subject: State Land Surveying Laws Impacting GIS Professionals
In the example of determining whether a hydrant is 500 feet from a school. If the GIS showed it was well within 500 feet both sides could merely stipulate that fact so it is no longer in contention and a surveyor wouldn’t be needed. If either side challenged the distance then a licensed surveyor would be needed.
——————————
Log in to reply.