Gotcha. My mistake.
Stephen
Andy
I haven't read the entire Florida bill but my understanding is that it would eliminate the requirement for a license for Land Surveyors. If that is the case, the answer to your question is NO. At this time, all states require some form of registration or licensure to legally practice Land Surveying.
Andy
Thank you, That is what I thought.
So, given that what we are facing is unprecedented in surveying, shouldn't ASCM or NSPS be weighing in on this potential fiasco?
Andy
The answer to that questions is YES.
Back to the original question...
According to the US Department of Labor: "Licensure. All 50 States and all U.S. territories license surveyors. For licensure, most State licensing boards require that individuals pass a series of written examinations given by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES). After passing a first exam, the Fundamentals of Surveying, most candidates work under the supervision of an experienced surveyor for 4 years before taking a second exam, the Principles and Practice of Surveying. Additionally, most States also require surveyors to pass a written examination prepared by the State licensing board.
Specific requirements for training and education vary among the States. An increasing number of States require a bachelor's degree in surveying or in a closely related field, such as civil engineering or forestry, regardless of the number of years of experience. Some States require the degree to be from a school accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). Most States also have a continuing education requirement.
Additionally, a number of States require cartographers and photogrammetrists to be licensed as surveyors, and some States have specific licenses for photogrammetrists."
Here is yet another thought[or maybe somebody posted this already and I missed it, you know, with all the fire bombing and all;-) ]
Doesn't the City, County and State require certain documents to be sealed by a currently Licensed, Professional Land Surveyor?
Does this mean that anyone with enough money to have a stamp made, will be able to stamp these documents?
Does this mean that these documents won't require a stamp anymore?
Sounds crazy to me, but then I might be missing something......
Douglas
Yes that is what I was saying. They can't just eliminate the board and license; they have to go find all of the things that require a license and eliminate those too or maybe they'll simply give it to the Civil Engineers but if they do that then it seems to me Florida had better give Civil PEs to all of the current LSs or put the LSs under the Engineer's board, give Civils the right to practice and let the LSs phase out over time. California has a Photogrammetrist license but you can't get one because they aren't issued anymore.
Quite a few civil engineering programs no longer even offer surveying courses - not to mention, surveying really not being part of the education, experience or exam process to get licensed as a PE. Quite a few Civil PEs out there would be practicing beyond their competence if they offered surveying services, even if the state allowed it.
True, I'm just wondering what their plan would be if they delete the license yet don't delete the requirement for a license elsewhere (such as subdivision statutes and government job specifications). The legislature probably isn't thinking of that problem or maybe they are?
> The legislature probably isn't thinking of that problem or maybe they are?
The legislature is thinking about one thing; Money.
Reminds me of building the Transcontinental Railroad: Just get the track laid, we will fix it later.
Ridiculous that they would be going after BORs, then - It's my understanding that most BORs are either self-sustaining and budget-neutral, if not actually making money for the state - though that money then gets sucked into the General Fund to be piddled away on other nonsense.
It's not about money or budgets.
States have far bigger fish to fry on their structural budget issues, than going after BORs. I still see this as nothing more than just more of the same old - advancing that idiotic, short-sighted Tea Party "deregulate and get government out of everyone's business" mantra that's going around.
Again I will say that there is nothing idiotic about getting state government out of the regulating and certifying of Auctioneers, Body Wrappers, Hair Braiders, Television Tube Labelers, and Water Machine Venders.
They among others are on the list. OUR JOB IS TO GET OURSELVES OFF THE LIST!!!
Stephen
Kent
Wrong category.
Don't get me wrong, some of those other occupations I could agree with deregulating. Maybe there is some nuance unknown to me, or maybe once upon a time there was an issue with unethical television tube labelers, to the point of getting the attention of the entire state legislature - who knows... But somehow I doubt that it's been such a meaningful issue for many decades. That sentiment probably has more to do with obsolescence or meaninglessness of a board than it does deregulation.
Dave, the regulation / certification of LS's is a state issue. Subdivision reg.s are a county issue. County is overruled. No issue.
Gov't job requirements. If there are no LS's then they can drop the requirement, amend the requirement, or waive the requirement. No issue.
Neither item would hold up the state from dropping LS (PSM in this case) from the books if they so desire. It would be up to the other areas of the law to adapt to it.
Stephen
I remember seeing the story behind hair braiders several years ago. A few shops opened (mostly in the ghetto) that did nothing but braid hair. The licensed barbers and hair stylists complained that hair braiding was unlicensed activity ... a separate license was the compromise, I guess. Apparently, the hair stylists have a lot of pull in the legislature, since they were the first to get off the list.
There's probably a similar story to all the other odd-ball occupations on the list.
Dave,
The legislature is not thinking so much about money as much as they are about appeasing an angry electorate.
That's how it seems to me anyway.
Stephen
Stephen - Wow, so there's no state law in Florida that requires a licensed individual to prepare subdivision maps or other land divisions, just County ordinances? Amazing if true.
Yes, it's in state law. In addition, state law requires that a second surveyor reviews/checks & signs the subdivision plat. Also, a boundary survey has to be submitted with the plat.
177.061?Qualification and statement required.—Every plat offered for recording pursuant to the provisions of this part must be prepared by a professional surveyor and mapper. The plat must be signed and sealed by that professional surveyor and mapper, who must state on the plat that the plat was prepared under his or her direction and supervision and that the plat complies with all of the survey requirements of this part. Every plat must also contain the printed name and registration number of the professional surveyor and mapper directly below the statement required by this section, along with the printed name, address, and certificate of authorization number of the legal entity, if any. A professional surveyor and mapper practicing independently of a legal entity must include his or her address.
Points taken.
Stephen
