what is real surveying?

Great article!?ÿ?ÿ

I don't see how the licensure in the U.S. serves the profession or the public.?ÿ Some of the states I work in have ridiculous definitions of surveying that encompass things like making measurements to determine the shapes of things or construction staking.?ÿ The Holy Boundary Surveyor is the gatekeeper of all measurement activities that can be monetized! This kind of overreach makes it difficult to understand licensure as something other than an effort to control market share.

The story about the environmental mapper taking a scolding at a survey conference is sadly consistent with my own observations.?ÿ There are few gigs less desirable than a non-surveyor speaking at a survey conference.?ÿ ?ÿThere's at least two guys in every room who want to do some grandstanding at the expense of the non-surveyors.?ÿ

I have respect for the boundary survey specialist, but that expertise is more a function of local knowledge than technical surveying skills.?ÿ ?ÿ

Measurement science is something many surveyors know and do. It is not our exclusive domain.

We are fast approaching (and may have passed up) the time where services are complex and important enough to require regulation. The existing framework doesn't support that. It will need to be a separate discipline. The only question is, will it be a type of surveyor or some other profession...

It was a good article, I enjoyed it.?ÿ I did notice something in there that struck a familiar chord; a possibly inflated relevance of licensure.

Before someone gets the wrong impression let me say I am a strong proponent of licensure for land surveyors.?ÿ But I do believe our profession at times is too quick to discount the work of non-licensed folks that?ÿmake a living with the same equipment we licensed surveyors use.?ÿ?ÿ I recall a post not long back where someone suggested there should be some restrictions on the sale of total stations to licensed surveyors only.?ÿ C'mon now...Really??ÿ

I you think equipment can't be properly operated without a license, I can show you far more examples where data and equipment was used?ÿimproperly by individuals with?ÿa license.?ÿ

My frame of reference comes from my experience surveying before Oklahoma even had such a thing as a licensed surveyor; which BTW occurred in 1969.?ÿ?ÿ I have known many men that never obtained their license but could survey circles around most of us if they were still with us.?ÿ And sadly I've?ÿseen far too many examples of folks that were able to "pass the test" and still have no earthly idea how to apply any book-smarts to a real live 'on the ground' situation.

While I think the majority of us are competent at what we do, we still seem to be our own worst enemy at times.?ÿ I enjoyed the article.

?ÿ

Posted by: thebionicman

Measurement science is something many surveyors know and do. It is not our exclusive domain.

We are fast approaching (and may have passed up) the time where services are complex and important enough to require regulation. The existing framework doesn't support that. It will need to be a separate discipline. The only question is, will it be a type of surveyor or some other profession...

Part of the statutory definition of surveying in Maryland is "conducting horizontal and vertical control surveys".

Which means if you wanted to set up a high accuracy GPS control network for your site to facilitate long term planning and development (for example I set one up for?ÿa large?ÿSmithsonian property a few years back) you could hire me, but not Dave Doyle.?ÿ

The technical?ÿphrase for?ÿthat is 'Crazy Talk"

Technology as far as measurement is concerned has far outpaced surveying laws. Most of the surveying laws now would be blown to bits by a hotshot lawyer as nothing more than restraint of trade. What we should do if we want to keep any sort of regulation is protect the boundary laws as needing a state licensed PLS and all the other stuff we are trying to hoard as only ours maybe require a PLS, BUT any state will do and some of it is already out of our sole domain, we just haven't legally let go.

I have made the argument for 25+ years that a control survey is pretty universal worldwide, same with topo, aerial mapping, construction staking, etc. The only thing that varies from state to state in any significant form is boundary law and sometimes almost from local county or city to the next, that is something that individual states may have a valid argument in protection of the public, all those other tasks individual states try to regulate really should be under a single national PLS designation or some such. The only reason IMO they are in the surveying laws state by state is historically only surveyors could competently provide those services, that is far from the case today.

SHG

I think you make a valid point...

However, enforcement has been a weak link, and state BOR's are fiscally weak.

I'd be in favor of a huge budget, for the bor's, and a long hard look at the overall purpose of even having bor's.

N

If NCEES establishes discipline related modules, the States could license geodetic surveyors and provide portability for each group as appropriate. The need for State tests would depend highly on the discipline and how robust the national exam is.

And Nate, if you go after that budget thing i wont try to stop you...?

?ÿ

Posted by: James Fleming

Part of the statutory definition of surveying in Maryland is "conducting horizontal and vertical control surveys".

Which means if you wanted to set up a high accuracy GPS control network for your site to facilitate long term planning and development (for example I set one up for?ÿa large?ÿSmithsonian property a few years back) you could hire me, but not Dave Doyle.?ÿ

The technical?ÿphrase for?ÿthat is 'Crazy Talk"

That is crazy - and the law needs to accommodate folks with the education, experience, and skills of Mr. Doyle.

More crazy talk - someone with no education, experience, or skills related to geodesy being allowed to do that work. It can be surprisingly easy for smooth talking folks with no real geodetic skills or experience to convince John Q. Public that they are THE best thing for their complex project. John Q. Public has very little ability to tell whether the guy talking has the skills of the Dave Doyle the geodesist or if it's all just BS.

It can be surprisingly easy for smooth talking folks with no real geodetic skills or experience to convince John Q. Public that they are THE best thing for their complex project. John Q. Public has very little ability to tell whether the guy talking has the skills of the Dave Doyle the geodesist or if it's all just BS.

I kind of feel like you just made a good argument for Licensure.

I say it's time we follow suit; ALL other professionals are licensed and practice in the field they are expert in.

Surveyors should too...