In a previous thread, the statement was made that surveyors had missed the GIS bus. I don't mean to call out my colleague from Texas as I've heard and read the statement many times over the past decade and a half. Basically the premise (as I've always understood it) is that surveyors have poopooed the less than centimeter precision of GIS and missed the opportunity to financially gain from locating features with lower precision and to contribute accurate cadastral data to improve the accuracy of GIS databases everywhere. I don't think this is actually true.
First, GIS is concerned with mapping features on the Earth, as are surveyors. This involves locating a feature with geodetic coordinates relative to some datum, and accurately cataloguing attributes of that feature. For the GIS professional, it could be all of the utility infrastructure for a power company. For the surveyor, it could be the curb in a parking lot. The GIS professional is going to be far more concerned with data about the utility infrastructure than the precise location of the infrastructure. The surveyor is less likely to be interested in data about the curb as he is the precision of its location (particularly relative to other local objects) and its physical dimensions. From what I can gather, this is basically where the similarities begin and end. The same geodesy is applied, the tools in the field are similar, the software is similar, but geared to an entirely different goal.
Most GIS administrators that I'm aware of are extremely computer literate. I know quite a few extremely computer literate surveyors as well, but one does not have to be an expert with databases, programming, networking, etc., to be a good surveyor. The same is not true with GIS professionals. The work requirements for a GIS administrator and surveyor are similar, but again, geared to an entirely different goal. The surveyor is concerned with making defensible determinations of the location land boundaries and providing those opinions to his client in a clear and concise manner. The GIS professional is concerned with acquiring data and then making that data available to a user segment. For the surveyor, the product is his opinion based on application of law and science. For the GIS professional, the product is orderly access to data.
Second, I have no doubt that one can have financial success as a GIS professional, but at present the opportunities seem restricted. How so? There are five surveyors in my city (and outlying area). Two are self-employed, one works for a governmental agency, another commutes to a larger neighboring city, and me (works for one of the self-employed). All of us are making a living at surveying in a fairly small town. The bigger city to the North and to the West have 10-20 each. This doesn't include the technicians working for them. I can find a dozen survey companies within 30 miles of where I am sitting in a matter of seconds. I can't find a single GIS company in my side of the State (and I'll happily remind you, Texas is a big State). I do see that many cities have a GIS department, but no private businesses providing GIS services in the area. Obviously, a GIS professional could find a rewarding career in one of these cities, but could he make it by putting a shingle out for AAA GIS services in a town of 10,0000? Not likely.
Third, surveyors are providing a more accurate cadastry for LIS/GIS. Every survey we've done since 2001 has been tied to the NSRS (National Spatial Reference System) - HARN or CORS. Thus every survey we've done that ultimately becomes part of a recorded conveyance contains coordinates that can place that property on the face of the Earth with very good accuracy. With this, neighboring tracts that were not tied to NSRS can be fitted to our surveys as well. Other surveyors are doing the same thing. Slowly, piece by piece we're accurately fitting the patchwork of land boundaries in a common system - and we're getting paid to do so.
Lastly, I can recall us seriously looking into entering the GIS market - mostly because of peer pressure that we, as surveyors, were missing out on a huge opportunity. We bought a submeter receiver, we bought some software and we started trying to learn the lingo of GIS. We showed up at a governmental meeting about GIS hoping the networking would open up new avenues for us. The presenter mentioned how data could be amassed by sending boy scouts out with consumer grade receivers (accurate to about 30 feet in those days) to locate objects, such as fire hydrants, to populate the GIS. It was in that moment that I realized that surveyors and GIS professionals have two different goals. The surveyor wants to accurately locate an object and collect a few relevant details pertaining to his work. A GIS professional is looking to populate his GIS database with data and disseminate that data to a targeted user group.
I don't say all of this to disparage GIS or surveyors who have found a way to be profitable in and with GIS. It's certainly possible, but I keep coming back to these two thoughts: Surveyors are not, and never were, the likely successors to GIS, because of the different skill set required; there are few local GIS shops that are doing the work surveyors just refused to do. So what bus exactly did we miss? I do believe that in the near future (and it is happening even now) that GIS techniques will become increasing helpful to surveyors. As a small example, every survey we've ever done (since 1983) is catalogued in an Access database. I can find a job by client name, location, parent tract, lot/block, etc. I even have a few entries linked to a pdf of the plat, which allows me to look at the survey while I'm in MS Access. All of the boundaries of surveys we've tied to NSRS are in a Google Earth file, which allows me to graphically see a job relative to the Earth and get the associated job number, which leads me to the paper file. More and more, surveyors are connecting photos, audio, video, sketches, etc. to points and geometries collecting in the field. These are all derivatives of GIS.
The reality is the industry and surveyors' associations dropped the ball 15 years ago by not embracing a new name and its new profit-generating markets.
When I went College in 1998-2000, the program was called Geomatics Engineering Technology. It covered various branches to the extent of the available time and curriculum, from the traditional surveying T16-style to the more computer-driven technologies such as GIS and GPS.
Even Trimble, one of the largest manufacturer of survey equipment saw a value in this idea. Trimble Geomatics Office aka TGO has an excellent definition in its glossary of the word and the possibilities it meant to the industry. TGO is a great software, the developers understood that mind set. Look up the definition of the (dreaded) word "geomatics" in the glossary, it is short, sweet and clear. This was a pot of gold that we should have grabbed.
As the years went on, manufacturers had to revise their position due to the reticence of the industry, hence as an example, today we are using Trimble Business Center. Today the college program has changed their name. This has been seen in many colleges across the land. As a group around the world, had we said "we are embracing this new direction" we wouldn't be in that situation today.
Sorry Shawn but we did not miss the bus. We simply did not bother showing up at bus stop because the bus had a new set of wheels we did not like.
I agree with both of you, kinda.
I did stand at the bus stop, saw the bus arrive, saw the destination, and chose not to get on.
To me GIS is Topo, not my cup of tea.
PS: I am very happy to be a GIS consumer, but have no interest in being a provider
James, what is it exactly you'd be doing differently today as a "Geomatician" or whatever the nomenclature du jour may be? Where would the bus we missed be going?
My point is that for the most part, I don't see a great deal of GIS work out there that I missed out on. Just because Trimble, an international corporation, picked an international term, geomatics, for a product listing... I don't see your point.
Peter, I actually like to do topo work. But GIS is even more data centric than topo. Again, GIS works to amass data and distribute it. Amassing data is part of what we do. Disseminating that data is not. It's also never been what I want to be doing, nor is it really part of surveying, it's IT.
> James, what is it exactly you'd be doing differently today as a "Geomatician" or whatever the nomenclature du jour may be? Where would the bus we missed be going?
>
> My point is that for the most part, I don't see a great deal of GIS work out there that I missed out on. Just because Trimble, an international corporation, picked an international term, geomatics, for a product listing... I don't see your point.
The GIS profession is now an independent entity. That could have been a branch of surveying. That's what the drive was circa 2000.
That's all I am saying.
I would say I have to disagree that surveyors missed the GIS bus, and instead re-phrase it that most surveyors that concentrate on traditional land surveying services missed the GIS boat. This is not a knock on others however, as traditional services is how our company was started and remained for quite some time until around 2000 or so.
Today, I can’t think of one of our major clients that does not require us to submit fully attributed shape files and geodatabases for every point, line, and feature that we survey, as well as have us perform custom GIS mapping and management for them. Granted, most of these are in the Top 100 biggest in the world, however even smaller oil and gas operators and clients now have full GIS departments and require their surveyors to have GIS departments as well, and those that don't have given us a competitive edge. One of our clients has over 50 pages of specifications on how we use and submit GIS data to them.
We have also built and maintained several online and offline GIS systems for clients that include hundreds of thousands of lease holds, permitted wells, pipelines, etc.
I think there is also a difference between individual surveyors trying to perform GIS and businesses that perform surveying along with other services. I have a degree in Geographic Information Science from A&M Corpus Christi and even though a large part of my classes were in GIS, I’m not a GIS person and don’t pretend to try and be. We have been successful in offering GIS services because we have spent the money and hired GIS professionals that know how to work together with our surveying department and create a product that is beneficial to our clients and we can be compensated for it. Our GIS department turns a profit every year.
The same can be said with HDS services. Most surveyors on this board always make fun of the other board for having so many articles on HDS, however I truly believe that this is where surveying is going and even though it was a large expense and learning curve, we have proven that it can be successful if you are willing to think outside the box. There will always be a need for boundary surveying, however there is so much more out there if we learn how to use and position ourselves in the various markets.
What If
Scenario:
What if there was a GIS Conference and convention early 2000's where a few surveyors had gotten involved. What if these surveyors were asked to form a committee for "National GIS Accuracies and Procedures". What if this committee came up with several levels of certifications to certify the GIS Accuracies and Procedures of geospatially located data. What if this successful committee made it so that the Professional Land Surveyor should be the one to certify to the GIS Accuracies and Procedures of a particular data base. What if that brought in a renewed interest in the profession that is in need of recruitment of these ultra smart, multitalented youth. What if.....
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
> If surveying is viewed as broader than boundary, then that could be a whole different discussion...
I agree. If surveying is viewed as boundary and traditional topo methods, then I guess I don't do a lot of surveying anymore.
that's a great example of a successful and profitable integration of GIS and surveying. thanks!
I'll take my own car, thanks...
With the advances over the last ten years in digital processing and geospatial recordation the GIS industry has become a vibrant, almost necessary, part of our everyday world. But it's not surveying.
About ten years ago I knew a land surveyor that went completely insane over "machine control"; as most of his work was construction layout. If you had asked him he would tell you it's the way of the future...get on the bus, NOW! Nowadays, he still builds terrain models for contractors and stays fairly busy. But his predictions of "apocalyptic" change in the surveying industry was more of an afternoon shower than a huge thunderstorm.
One of my clients is a small utility company that serves an approximately 2500 sq. mi. area that I provide with r/w documentation and consultation. This includes a tremendous amount of field location of outside plant utilities AND land or property ties. Their records department utilizes ArcGIS and, for a while, was in shambles. Not due to anything but user inexperience and ignorance of geodetics.
Their field engineers would locate outside plant with their mapping grade equipment and the GIS department would be frustrated because it came in on the wrong side of the road or twisted in the wrong direction.
Although I tried to avoid becoming involved, I secretly was waiting for someone over there to ask me if I could help. Over the last year we've been able to clean-up their data and it's an ongoing process.
Their geodetic PLSS grid is apparently something similar to the lat long provided by EarthPoint; fairly close, but never approaching anything "precise". One poor practice that I have finally got them to understand is not to move the data to fit the PLSS grid; rubberband the grid.
A few of the local municipalities provide them with "intelligent" shape files of the recorded plats for new development. I've gotten them to understand that the position of the file is probably closer than their "out-of-the-box" grid. I now provide them with shape files of all the R/Ws I produce and section line info. After a year or two the db is starting to take shape.
This wasn't something I pursued and surely isn't something for which I feel responsible. We had several meetings concerning my time: who could authorize it, and who would pay for it.
In a nutshell, geospatial recordation needs quality professional input to be anywhere near accurate. I'm glad I have the opportunity to provide that. But the two worlds are almost like oil and water..an emulsifier is required to keep thing in a mixture. There's junk in their db that is cartoons, there's junk in there that is good as gold. As time moves on I hope they continue to refine their records with my help. I'm glad to help and I get to charge for it.
There's a lot of surveying grade "boots-on-the-ground" work that needs to be done with almost every GIS db. I don't consider it as much land surveying as I do data collection. But who's going to pay? I'm surely not going to provide my professional services for free. In my world it's pro quid pro; something for something. My client finally understands the process of adding a little good data everyday in order to eventually have a db that is anywhere near correct or reliable.
Surveyors are available for consultation concerning geospatial problems. But if anyone missed the bus, it's the subscribers and end users of the fantastic software that is available for GIS. The salesmen always seem to fail to tell the purchaser that "Garbage In Equals Garbage Out". We can help if consulted.
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveying
Surveying or land surveying is the technique, profession, and science of accurately determining the terrestrial or three-dimensional position of points and the distances and angles between them, commonly practiced by licensed surveyors, and members of various building professions.
Surveying is not all Boundary delineation.
copied from http://txls.texas.gov/the-board/
The mission of the Texas Board of Professional Land Surveying is to establish and enforce standards ensuring the competency of individuals licensed as land surveyors resulting in the orderly use of our physical environment for the protection of our citizens, the current and future property owners, of Texas.
I would have liked to have seen a certification program for only those that wish to be certified, that would require a professional land surveyors seal to certify to the accuracy of GIS data. This way I could look at the meta data of a GIS and see if the data is spatially certified.
I am just looking toward other areas to expand the profession. If you dont like the idea, great. Does anyone have some positive ideas to expand the profession and entice new recruits?
I'll take my own car, thanks...added a What if
:good: That is great!
I would like to add a What IF......
What if the utility company was being appraised for a possible merger with a larger firm.... What if you were able to certify to the accuracy of the geodatabase.... What if the larger firms appraisal company saw great value in the certification....
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
> > If surveying is viewed as broader than boundary, then that could be a whole different discussion...
>
> I agree. If surveying is viewed as boundary and traditional topo methods, then I guess I don't do a lot of surveying anymore.
I agree Matt, I probably should call myself something else. LOL:-)
couldn't do it..
Certify, that is. My input on that particular db is but a small part of the records that are combined within.
They do have file records of all my location surveys, rw and easements that have been added. Those are surveys and bear a certificate. I had no control over the information after I provided it to the client however. I'd have to look for the specific wording, but I made sure my contract addendum mentioned something about "mapping grade" and wasn't to be confused with a "precise land survey". At the time, positional tolerances weren't brought up, but I think I'm safe.
Interesting scenario, though..What if the db was sold or distributed? What sort of liability could some junkyard dog attorney try to pin on me if a location was a few ten-thousands of a second off in latitude or longitude?
Not gonna loose a bit of sleep over it. That's the secret to the "long life". Worry is a great waste of imagination! 😉
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
Ain't that the truth! Can't seem to live down a surveyors license, no matter how many engineering or law degrees you get. Very strange the perceptions of surveyors in some areas of the U.S.. But part of the problem is that surveyors are thought of as boundary people; and then they don't measure up to it. So you have on the one hand those that want distinction for much more than boundary, but on the other hand those that see surveyors can't even do boundaries (every surveyor puts the boundary somewhere else) so why would we want them to screw up other things as well?
It's hard to be part engineer and part judge. Not many can do it, and virtually nobody appreciates it if you can.
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
:good:
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
>
> It's hard to be part engineer and part judge. Not many can do it, and virtually nobody appreciates it if you can.
I think that's the problem, too many guys think they're engineers and judges and they wind up learning a little bit about everything and gain no expertise whatsoever. They become jack of all trades and master of none. Let's take GIS for example, I have quite a bit of formal training on the subject matter but I don't have any experience or interest in pursing it. When I hear that GIS should have been the realm of Land Surveyors, I ask myself how many Land Surveyors actually have enough training/background to actually realize this?
I think it's pretty arrogant to believe that a Surveyor's License qualifies people to do all things Surveying. Because the reality is that it is a pretty broad field.
Surveying industry has missed many buses!
Over the years I have witnessed in OZ the self destruction of a tightly knit profession.
Started with Education after the graduate emerged. No problem there , but the same non graduate LS sages decided we needed technicians to do the field work under supervision, so a lower education course to create survey technicians was created. These technician quickly realised the huge opening as LS were charging too much for engineering surveying so set up in opposition. At the time in the 1970s I said this would happen. I also said it that it would remove the basic work experience that we then graduates did to become proficient in the field with crew, job management and instrument use and procedures.
We then had many one and two man firms setting up in the cadastral arena as the geodetic work was then done by federal and state government, plus military surveys. That then tended to be done by displaced personnel who set up when government closed down or down sized their activities to then pursue that tendered geodetic work.
The area of land division then also changed at the same time, with the advent of local government area development plans, but all surveyors, but one missed the bus in entering the lucrative planning appeal arena that was taken up by planners and lawyers.
Then as we hit the technological boom surveyors as stated above concentrated on the millimetres with the new toys. Almost scoffing at the sub metre work required for GIS. Here same happened with our engineering techs and computer whizzes jumping in with their handhelds to do the work.
Other fields of surveying have opened where the newer graduates are entering, but they are working for corporates as the jobs are too large for the small players.
Meanwhile unless you are an experienced and a wanted/successful boundary professional there are many simply muddying the water at he lower end trying to survive this recession that was cause by the greedy US wankers/err bankers.
Perhaps the current education system that exists in many states of simply learning from your company's surveyor(s)to become a like boundary and engineering surveyor with out a degree has also been a strong reason why the bus was missed.
Here at least the graduate has a chance to enter all of the different fields of surveying that were not around when I stated out at university around half a century ago, with my life's surveying in the the then traditional boundary and engineering arenas and adding in planning/land division. When I was at university we were astronomically fixing positions with stars and sun, with GPS but a remote pipe smoking hazy "be great if we could" dream. But at least I embraced GPS when the satellite numbers made it a practical tool.
I see the future of small firms being extremely financially bleak and larger firms reemerging to offer a wider range of surveying application solutions to suit today's larger client needs.
I suggest that if US surveyors do not all embrace the degree path and the reservation of LS qualification for only the boundary surveyor, then the current States without degree paths will stifle the required broaden knowledge required to be members of future successful surveying teams.
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
> >
> > It's hard to be part engineer and part judge. Not many can do it, and virtually nobody appreciates it if you can.
>
> I think that's the problem, too many guys think they're engineers and judges and they wind up learning a little bit about everything and gain no expertise whatsoever. They become jack of all trades and master of none. Let's take GIS for example, I have quite a bit of formal training on the subject matter but I don't have any experience or interest in pursing it. When I hear that GIS should have been the realm of Land Surveyors, I ask myself how many Land Surveyors actually have enough training/background to actually realize this?
> I think it's pretty arrogant to believe that a Surveyor's License qualifies people to do all things Surveying. Because the reality is that it is a pretty broad field.
I would have to politely disagree. I might be arrogant if I said that every land surveyor's license qualified that person to do every job that could be fathomed to be asked of a land surveyor......However, I would not take a job doing a land boundary of the gulf of mexico. Why! You ask!? Because I am not specialized in that area of the state. I have never done a boundary survey on the waters of the gulf of mexico. I have enough respect for the land to not mistreat it with my naivety of gulf tides and boundaries. I have a geology degree and have taken several classes pertaining to hydrology and beach geology including identification of tidal features.
I would not ask a ambulance chasing lawyer to help with boundary law litigation.
I would not ask a general physician to dig a tumor out of my brain.
I would not ask a general mechanic to tune up a exotic supercar. The same as I would not ask Enzo Ferrari to change my oil, partially because her is pushing up roses and part because he is not the right person to go to.
That being said, I think the skills of a surveyor are a good place to start and not a set of skills that should be contained and predetermined.
Respectfully yours,
Wes
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
>
> That being said, I think the skills of a surveyor are a good place to start and not a set of skills that should be contained and predetermined.
>
> Respectfully yours,
> Wes
I got no problem with that Wes. I think (don't want to speak for you) you just touched on gist of my argument. If boundary Surveying is so broad, what does that say for the other sub fields (Geodesy, GIS, Engineering Surveying etc). I still believe that to properly serve the public there has to be a certain level of expertise. I don't think that a Land Surveying License is enough, particularly when most entry level GIS people I know have a post graduate degree.
Ralph