Surveying industry has missed many buses!
:good: :good:
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
> 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."
It looks like the new FS exam does a lot to broaden the knowledge base that you are tested on to get your license. IMO being a RPLS means that you have proven that you are a Professional Land Surveyor.
Like you said Surveying is a broad field. I don't understand how people think that just because they are an RPLS that somehow they are automatically an expert on any other segment of surveying other than boundary surveying.
Why not have other licensing opportunities for GIS Professional, Professional Goedesist, etc. ?
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
> > 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."
>
> It looks like the new FS exam does a lot to broaden the knowledge base that you are tested on to get your license. IMO being a RPLS means that you have proven that you are a Professional Land Surveyor.
>
> Like you said Surveying is a broad field. I don't understand how people think that just because they are an RPLS that somehow they are automatically an expert on any other segment of surveying other than boundary surveying.
>
> Why not have other licensing opportunities for GIS Professional, Professional Goedesist, etc. ?
I've been saying that for a while but I don't want to start an argument that has been raging since the days of the old RPLS.com
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
Have been saying that for years!!!Beavers Did you see my response down bottom of these response post? As said that again today.
RADU
"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."
Exactly; a surveyors license should be an indication of an educated and experienced resume. It should reflect someone who is able to learn how to perform any of the services under the umbrella of the profession. One can't be an expert in all areas of a profession. In fact, I would argue that it's not a profession at all if one could be an expert in all areas of it.
Some surveyors become experts in more than one area some maybe only one. But the use of technology can't be limited to the professions. GIS (and measurement technology)are used as an analysis tool in all the professions, trades, businesses.
There are those who think the surveying profession could have captured GIS and GPS as exclusive to be performed under the surveying license. And so, somehow surveyors missed the bus. Nothing could be further from the truth. There was never any possibility of that happening, and never will be. Likewise, flying robots or any other technology.
Technology has and is taking jobs out of the surveying profession just as it has with all professions. The days of making a living measuring for others are about done. We have seen the field crews go solo and others buying equipment (GPS and conventional) to perform their own measurements, machine control, UAV's, submersibles, etc.. The question is: what advanced knowledge will the surveyor offer that adds value to the measurements and that can't be automated or taken care of by a computer (office or field) with a minimally trained technician? There needs to be a lot of different answers to that in order to sustain a profession.
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
You're right Duane, but I don't think the measurement aspect of it is dying. There is still a strong market for providing measurement services. I think the paradigm is certainly changing and most are not adapting to this change.
To paraphrase Charles Darwin: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”
I'm bringing 2 GIS/Survey Engineers on board this month. Most of these large projects include GIS/LIS in the scope, we're trying to be prepared for what comes our way.
Ralph
> I'm bringing 2 GIS/Survey Engineers on board this month.
Just curious where you recruit from. One of our big problems is that we can't fill positions with qualified graduates that want to work in our market.
For years surveying has been "sold" as a profession where you get to work both outside and in the office, and it seems that we draw from the same group of young people who want to go into fields like natural resources. Even though more than 80% of the U.S. population now lives in urban areas, it seems like the graduates of U.S. survey programs are drawn from a pool of students that want to stay in rural areas.
Whenever I advertise I get most of my resumes from Europe or the two bachelors programs in Puerto Rico.
Ralph
GIS has been part of our survey programs in NY for at least 10 years. But you're correct that most want field and office. We started another program a few years back called geospatial technology. That program has a couple surveying courses, more GIS and CADD, and computer programming. The program draws more of those who want to work computers in an office all day.
And I don't think measurement science is dying. In fact, more of it going on now than ever before. I do see there is and will be less of it exclusively in the hands of surveyors as it used to be. Those who become experts in certain areas will remain in demand. One of the imperatives is that surveyors do keep up with technology and stay on the leading edge. This requires upgrading equipment on a regular basis, no longer one gps unit every 10 years because then someone else will be better positioned for the job. And hiring GIS/engineering/boundary personnel, whatever it may be to keep your company on the leading edge of technical knowledge.
This is not really a new thing. New and specialy trained employees have always been one the things that keeps any company vibrant and competetive.
Send me an email with your contact info and I can set you up with our career office. You can look at the geospatial program requirements at mvcc.edu.
Ralph
> > I'm bringing 2 GIS/Survey Engineers on board this month.
>
> Just curious where you recruit from. One of our big problems is that we can't fill positions with qualified graduates that want to work in our market.
>
> For years surveying has been "sold" as a profession where you get to work both outside and in the office, and it seems that we draw from the same group of young people who want to go into fields like natural resources. Even though more than 80% of the U.S. population now lives in urban areas, it seems like the graduates of U.S. survey programs are drawn from a pool of students that want to stay in rural areas.
>
> Whenever I advertise I get most of my resumes from Europe or the two bachelors programs in Puerto Rico.
It's interesting, there is quite a bit of local qualified talent out here. If you'd like I'll put you in contact with Dr. Potts at NJIT. That's a great starting point, you'll more than likely have guys/gals that already work in the industry full time and are working their degrees part time, you're not that far away from Penn State either.
Ralph
"Missing the GIS bus that GIS missed"
They should just cut it all loose from licensing except for the legal aspects of boundary surveying. Beef up the land boundary expert with legal training and cut all the measurement stuff loose. That's what happening anyway. You can't put it back in the box, measurement technology is rampant, almost everybody has access to it.
Surveying industry has missed many buses!
>
> 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.
I can't say I am "enjoying" this thread, but you guys are making interesting points and the dialog is keeping me from working for a bit.
An aside: My state board currently has a 1 time opening for "GIS Professionals" to apply for and receive licensure (PLS) without either exam (no fundamentals/ no p&p)!
Yeah, I still kinda choke on it whenever the idea pops back into my consciousness.
and, there are some requirements to document actual GIS project management.
Not sure where they're heading, but maybe a move to require full credentials (i.e. education -as it is now mandatory in my state-, experience and exams) for GIS chiefs.
Only time will tell...
Surveying industry has missed many buses!
> An aside: My state board currently has a 1 time opening for "GIS Professionals" to apply for and receive licensure (PLS) without either exam (no fundamentals/ no p&p)!
That's horrible
Surveying industry has missed many buses!
I would believe that for a State to declare any specific industry to be required to be licensed to practice, they must have a sepearate group of specific knowleged professionals in place.
Thus, create a title of GIS professional and grant a license to the existing practicing experts that are currently making a living from and presto, they have another group to govern.
I am sure that there is more to the procedure. Remembrance of the history of how Texas surveyors became licensed as told to me thru the years by many people, that kinda sums it up.
I've been to the seminar, saw the relevance, met a few experts and a few that are using the technology today and still know very little because I have not applied myself to do and setup it in my business.
Back in the 80s I setup a search engine using 14* main threads with spreadsheet software. It would only find where info would be located in our records. * = name, abstract number, book, plat, Headright name, etc
New manager arrived and deleted the files because he could not understand it.
GIS is that in a digital world putting all those threads into a visual map showing the actual data in place.
I'm too vested to change from paper to digital without somebody offering free labor.
B-)
Hi folks. I normally lurk here, picking up tips on GPS, OPUS, and that sorta stuff. I though I'd chime in on this discussion, though.
In terms of the original post, I would be considered a "GIS Professional", although for my job, I'm really more of a cartographer. I work for a regional agency that provides, as a small part of its scope, GIS services to its member counties and towns. And mostly, they want maps that look good and show things like they want them shown. A map is usually the end result. Trail maps. Annexation maps. Enterprise Zones. Zoning. Maps for grant applications and administration purposes (most of what we do.) Utility maps. All sorts of tourism maps. (NO BOUNDARY MAPS! I know better.)
What sets GIS apart from just plain old cartography, is what goes on with the data behind the maps. As the original post said, yes, you need experience dealing with software and databases. Programming & scripting is a huge help, too. I pull data from all sorts of places, including USGS and state agencies. You have to make it all work and play together. I try to stay on top of projections and datums And I roll a lot of my own data, through digitization of aerials or GPS field work. It all depends on what the end result needs to be. I maintain a really good, large GIS database for my 3 county area. Its not good like you guys would like, because probably none of it (except maybe some of the utility data) is survey-grade stuff. I wish it was! (And for the record, you can't do much real work with a recreation grade GPS unit). But compared to a LOT of GIS data out there, I try to make a good trade-off between positional accuracy (at least for data I created) and keeping good data attributes. I provide data (usually shapefiles) to consultants doing work for the counties/towns, and sometimes the counties/towns themselves as needed. I do not maintain their tax parcel databases, as each county has a dedicated GIS person that does tax parcel and usually addressing.
I sometimes wish when I'd been in college, surveying and GIS were a combined field. I would love to have the freedom/knowledge/licensing to go out and pick up a boundary line or do a real topo map, with a total station and/or GPS, and come back in here and combine it with my other GIS data to make some really fantastic maps that looked good and had accurate boundaries. We use GPS a lot (we have an RTK setup, actually), and I try to be as accurate with it as possible, but I don't touch anything that would cross the surveying license line. I have to admit that sometimes I wish I could. But the reality is that most of my clients/customers just want a map that shows what they need to see and looks good and is simple to understand. I may strive to map water lines within a centimeter, then slap it on a paper map at a scale where it wouldn't matter if it were 3' off. They don't care. But I do.
What you said is true around here, about the number of GIS jobs. In our 3 county area, there are maybe 5 of us that work primarily in GIS, and all 5 are government jobs. There is one consulting/engineering/surveying firm that will do some maps, but I wouldn't say they take on many GIS projects. For a private firm that specializes in GIS, you have to go to the cities. On the other hand, there are probably 10-15 traditional surveying firms in the area. Somebody was asking me about GIS jobs in the area the other day, and I had to tell them to just go to the cities, because even if they landed a government GIS job, the pay is not 1/3 of what you can get in the private sector.
I do have some interaction with surveyors, and I've never had a problem. They are usually helpful, and they understand what I'm trying to accomplish and how its different from what they are doing. The ones around here are typically doing boundary, topo, and construction work and they don't seem to mind us doing maps/GIS analysis. I worked with one on an annexation map. He did the boundary map and determined the acreages, and I used that to do a map showing where the population was concentratred, utilities, zoning, etc. I don't know if he secretly wished to do the GIS side of it, but I would have been happy to have a job doing the surveying side of it!
Wow thanks for the insight...
Wow thanks for the insight, Andy. I think you've understood what I was initially trying to say.
Regarding accuracy, I think this is where some are not understanding the financial aspect of this. You provide a product that meets a need. Perhaps the client doesn't need centimeters. Perhaps they need sub meter, or meters level for a specific mapping project, so why would they want to pay for mapping at a magnitude or two order of precision unnecessarily? If they require greater accuracy, then they would be willing to pay for it. However, many seem to think that databases need to meet some criteria. I have a database of all of our projects since 1983. I don't want anyone telling me, by law, what my database should include or should not include. IT'S MY DATABASE! And so, the notion that a database should have been mandated to meet some regulatory requirement seems very "off" to me. I prefer the client and professional to be allowed as much flexibility in determining what the project needs are and how best to meet them.
While our fields overlap, they are unique. Surveying also overlaps numerous other disciplines: such as engineering and geodesy. This doesn't make surveyors competent to be engineers or geodesists, but a certain degree of knowledge is beneficial for work that includes skills from those disciplines. I'm sure the same could be said for GIS, perhaps even more so, because your database may include information on all sorts of things - from utility infrastructure to commercial.
I think some of the problem with this topic is that there are surveyors who have an insecurity regarding the perceived nobility of surveying. I still find it to be a rewarding and respectable profession. I don't need to rebrand it or alter its fundamental purpose to feel relevant. I will, however, exploit the resources of other professions, such as GIS technology, to improve the quality and efficiency of what I do.
Wow thanks for the insight...
Interesting thread, folks.
So where do we go moving forward?
Wow thanks for the insight...
> So where do we go moving forward?
We live in the most incredible country at the most incredible time in history. The opportunity to be and do anything (in spite of continued regulatory attempts to obstruct this opportunity) is unbelievable. A surveyor can pursue anything his talent will allow him - including engineering, geodesy, programming, architecture, and GIS data management. If such fields interest someone, or a blend of such a field and land surveying, then this is the time and place to do it. But there is nothing to be ashamed of in surveying. If surveying is financially satisfying and personally fulfilling, there is no need to "go" anywhere - only continued personal development in gaining new skills and honing existing ones that make you better to your clients and more profitable to those whom depend on you financially.
This is my humble opinion of course.
Wow thanks for the insight...
I agree. :good:
I do hope that, as a society, we don't go overboard with licenses and overstratification.
I can only speak from my own experience but I don't think as a surveyor working for a utility as I do, you can say we as a profession 'missed the bus'. They really are two distinctly different field that overlap and compliment each other, depending on the client and market's needs. Quite a few of the people I went to school with went on into the GIS field and have done really well, mostly working for Government or large resource based industries here in Alaska like the oil & gas industry. They are filling a need to manage large amount of data and to make that data more accessible. The phone utility I work for covers a service area larger than many States on the East Coast and began recently converting to a GIS/database driven platform that allows them to keep a running tally on their outside plant (cables and switches and so forth) so that any new job being designed in the system is constantly being updated throughout their entire database. Sort of a one stop shopping for design and inventory. You would think that this automation would reduce the need to have a licensed surveyor on staff, but it's really just the opposite. When it comes to dealing with land issues, it's not enough to generate a pretty map when your spending millions of dollars to install fiber optic cables. Routes still require someone with the knowledge and experience (and a license) to determine where boundaries fall on the ground. With that said, I love GIS and have utilized it to my own benefit in many ways. When I started here I geo-referenced all the surveys my predecessor had done and built a database that allows me to find a file or past work in a matter of seconds. I guess all I'm saying is the two fields compliment each other and have much to offer the other and in this day and age, I don't see how or why someone wouldn't have a foot in both worlds.
Wow thanks for the insight...
Accuracy (geographical) is important, but it is expensive. Depending on what you are doing, and what the needs are, high accuracy may not be worth the expense. For our member governments, it is worth the expense when they are designing water systems or laying out new roads or working with boundary lines, and for those things they pay surveyors and engineers to do that.
But for a map showing all the canoe put-ins on a couple rivers, or a map showing population density of elderly people, or redistricting maps, geographical accuracy down to a centimeter is not usually necessary. But you do need the attribute data be correct. And all that is stored in databases (since you definitely don't want to have to manually enter all that data for every map or project you do.)
Tax parcel maps are a prime example of this. For most purposes, at least of our counties, tax parcels do not need to be accurate to a centimeter. The geographic accuracy of the line is secondary to having good data behind it. If I click on a parcel on their webGIS, I want it to have the right owner data, pin #, etc. If a boundary is off by 50 feet, it is ok, because it is just a representation of the parcel that an owner owns. You want to get an idea of where your parcel is, and who owns what around you. Sure, survey-grade boundaries would be awesome, but once you start advertising your tax parcels as having that kind of accuracy, aren't you opening yourself up to a lot of liabilities? I'd rather see a link to a PDF of the actual survey plat. This is why we call them tax parcel databases and not property boundary databases.
I think given the right level of education and expertise and desire, a surveyor could do anything I do, and more, and do it well. Particularly since there is no licensing (in my state) for GIS. Very little barrier to entry depending on the job. For GIS people wanting to stick their foot in the surveying world, its more difficult because of the licensing requirements, but if someone wants it bad enough, they could do it. I wish I could have.
The two fields do have a lot of overlap, and their are things that set them apart as well. I've never really understood the disregard for each other from both groups, that I see sometimes. Surveyors do a job in the field that a lot of GIS people simply could not or would not do. I think its a much more precise, methodical product that they create, and it serves a purpose. I appreciate the detail and accuracy I see in survey plats and engineering drawings.
GIS people produce representations of data, through analysis and mapping and symbology and simplification of data, and honestly there can be a lot of creativity in the end result, especially when you get into producing cartographic maps like I do. Most of my end users don't need to see the type of detail that is present in most plats or engineering drawings; its just overwhelming for what they need.
I will address the "GIS Monkey" nickname I see from time to time! There are those in the GIS world that do believe that whatever their database says is the Gospel truth. And they don't understand the limitations of their data. And they think their map is better than a real survey plat. Those people are wrong. A true GIS professional knows better than that, and understands the limitations of their data, and the purpose for which its use is best suited.
