One Can Pass The Survey Exam At 70%
There is more to learn in all areas after that also because what is known and can be done increases. Still a lot of that knowledge does not apply to boundary surveys.
I assert that repetitive mathematical skills are mechanically reused in mapping. No matter what the map looks like the required skill set varies little.
The point is that 5, 10 or 50 years of those experiences that are not boundary line experience can not be substituted for 1 day of boundary line experience.
Paul in PA
Me, I tend to agree with much of Paul's broad brush critique of the NCEES agenda vs what many consider actual professional surveying. Maybe the surveyors need a wake up call instead of going bedside with the engineering community.
I kind of like the schools of thought that would just as soon put boundary determination right along side the legal professions. Let the mappers, construction guys, GIS'ers, even John Q Public do their thing to the uninformed highest bidder. When the fertilizer hits the ventilator then the legal process comes into play and we all just went full circle about 50 yrs or so. All permitting issues notwithstanding of course.
How many times have you seen a very seasoned boundary guy totally screw up a parking lot or god forbid plans with overlapping contours. Or try and watch a very seasoned construction guy scratch his head over a couple or 3 pin cushions on one 5 acre parcel they have to stake the 5 ft building setbacks on.
Not all of us have the good fortune to have been exposed and experienced in much of it. Me, I don't do anchor bolts, interior industrial jobs, and always try and avoid certain riparian issues as well as certain mining jobs. But gimme a boundary, topo, staking on that 5 or 50 acres and it's all good.
So yes Paul, one size does not fit all. The beloved NCEES thinks it can make it happen, I think? What is good in PA wouldn't fly in NV, or other Western states. Vice versa, take a Western PLSS guy to any original 13 M & B states, or much of East of the Mississippi.... yikes.
One Can Pass The Survey Exam At 70%
> The point is that 5, 10 or 50 years of those experiences that are not boundary line experience can not be substituted for 1 day of boundary line experience.
>
> Paul in PA
Exactly! There are many different kinds of surveying. All of the boundary line experience in the world doesn't mean you are automatically qualified to perform any other type of surveying.
I don't understand your need to try and belittle every other type of surveying and act like boundary surveying is the only real branch of surveying.
In the foregoing dialogues we again had the manifestation that, like water and oil, Engineering and Surveying does not mix. In the beginning, surveying meant land boundary surveying and it was often stated that "An Engineer does not a Surveyor make". Then we had to distance our profession from interloping Engineers (construction surveyors) by expanding the title to "Land Surveying" as in the LS series. Then Registered Surveyors (RLS); then Professional Surveyors (PLS). By creeping changes in definition, Land Surveying has now also come to mean construction surveying, geodetic surveying, Photogrammetry, and GIS, all lumped into one. Fortunately our state laws and rules kept this changing definition at bay, that is until the assault by the NCEES Model Law which would have Land Surveying to include all measurements performed above, upon or below the earth. The construction surveyors et al want our license. They don't want to share it, they want ALL of it, as in "lets replace the boundary experience requirement with a four year survey degree with three credits in boundary".
Why are Engineers and Surveyors so different? Figure it out for yourselves, but it should be stated that the difference cannot be resolved.
As for surveyors who perform both et al surveys and Boundary surveys, well I have too, but we have to have a split personality about it. Like PE/LSs who ALWAYS behave and think like Engineers, our boundary work usually suffers in this combination.
So, cut Paul some slack, he is more right than you think.
Looking forward to your follow-up article on this one 😉
"It appears that NCEES wants the profession to conform to what it can readily test..."
Legal principles related to boundary determination can be readily tested in a national exam. State exams have plenty of room to test the minor nuances that exist in the boundary area.
As Paul points out, the problem with the experience only route is that one may perform the same thing over and over without learning much, or the same thing over and over incorrectly while thinking it's correct.
More than once a client has asked me "why can't surveyors stake out a building properly?". Similar inquiry's about boundaries. The answer is always the same. They are doing it the way the boss always did it (and of course the boss is always the best surveyor in the county, state, whatever). Unfortunately, the equipment and circumstances are different and the surveyor does not know enough of the underlying law or measurement science to understand how to adjust procedures or analysis.
The new NCEES model law does not add to the old one. In fact, since the 1950's when it first came out in a position paper, it has been steadily narrowed, mostly by influence of engineering interests (but also landscape architects, GIS practitioners, geologists, foresters, etc.) who wish to be the only ones (or at least included in the list of those) allowed to perform tasks traditionally accomplished by surveyors.
There is a push for more of a national standard in both engineering and surveying. But make no mistake, the new NCEES model law does not expand the national standard, it narrows it. In its narrower form it still may be an expansion of any individual States' law, but in many cases it would be narrowing State definitions.
And, any elimination of boundary experience thoughts derive strictly from the State that is suggesting them, not from NCEES or their model definition. But yes, it is expected that a well educated and experienced professional surveyor should be minimally competent in areas of practice included in the model law. It is up to any State that adopts it to use a licensing procedure they think is necessary. But it is hoped that similar definitions would result in similar paths to licensure, thereby building credibility and reliability of the profession.
Now, let the misinformation continue....
A search for the truth
:good:
Are you kidding me??
> .... as well as boundary staking are all just easilly reproduced mathmatics UNTIL things start getting twisted.
I'm really starting to believe this isn't an accidental exclusion of the sarcasm font.........
> I agree that they are two different skill sets. Boundary surveying is heavy on research and interpretation, construction is reliant on confidence and the ability to think on your feet.
>
> If this erroneous comment is a reaction to the recent proposal for two different licenses, I again disagree. We are in such a specialized field already, there is no need to limit us more. Separation of the licence is the first step in eliminating surveyors from construction projects all together.
>
> Most of the smaller firms I have worked for have done both, the boundary work keeps us afloat, the construction work brings us profit.
BINGO!!!! Someone finally has admitted the truth!!!!!!
Now, if we only continue to do the same things as we have in the past AND reduce the barriers to entering the boundary surveying profession, the ability to make a living surveying boundaries will increase. What was that old saying about the definition of insanity??
This is exactly the "thinking" that has brought us to this point. The complete misconception that a mere 3 credits in boundary law & legal descriptions (no, not 3 credits is each, one 3 credit class for both boundary law & legal descriptions) and a few years staking curb & gutter, creating topo's, and "staking" boundaries (whatever that is - perhaps "engineering speak" for expressing a professional opinion, in accordance with relevant boundary law, on the location of the legal boundary between two estates?) is more than enough to hang a shingle and declare oneself a "Professional Land Surveyor"
[sarcasm]No wonder we leave these important decisions to licensing boards filled with engineers.[/sarcasm]
Duane
I AGREE. Thank you for nailing it!
Like other professions
I also find it quite interesting how territorial different "types" of Surveyors can be.
How about getting a good solid education, good solid experience and a good solid test?
Then when you pass hopefully you are a "good solid" professional that can choose what parts of the profession to practice.
Like other professions
> Bingo.
I'd like all the other surveyors reading this to ask themselves a question I've asked myself:
How much of your boundary experience have you obtained before AND how much after licensure?
mmmmkay?
Paul,
I'm going to have to disagree on several points. While the measurement side of construction and topographic surveys may not be overly complex, there are a few things being overlooked. Methods and sequence of construction are essential pieces of the puzzle for a good construction surveyor. He better have a solid understanding of zoning as well. We all know who is on the carpet when things go awry. The topographic and resource Surveyor needs to have a good handle on basic design and modeling. Without that there will be delays and return trips (think $$$).
Granted these will not help in determining a boundary location, but they are valuable skills that don't come after a year or two. They also reinforce our attention to detail and proficiency with our equipment. I have found in my own career that every facet of what we do improves my abilities in other areas. I suppose it's a matter of perspective. My approach is to look for applications for the things I know. Even my seminary days make me a better surveyor. The processes and rules for determining intent of ancient texts helps me frequently, but I digress.
For 35 years I have performed a wide variety of tasks. Construction staking, topo, remediation, monitoring, boundary and more. Without the variety I would not be half the boundary Surveyor I am today. It puzzles me why anyone would exclude these from the things we are licensed to do. That view in no way means I support removal of the most essential of our duties (boundary) from the law. Recognizing the value of one service does not require me to devalue another...
Many construction surveyors make top wages. Way up there. Why is that?
Like other professions
:good:
Very Good Post, Paul, in Pa. I wished I'd a Said all that!!!
I heard another surveyor say it like this one time: "He learned all he is gonna learn, in his first 6 months of surveying. Now, he is just repeating all the mistakes he learned to make, during his first 6 months, and he calls it ""20 yrs experience...""
Ya!
Get em sam!
N
