My Ph.D. research at the University of Florida since 2003 shows that today almost all counties (parishes) in the United States and in many other countries now own and maintain public Digital Parcel GIS Maps (“Parcel GIS Map”) which were usually created from the hand-drawn tax maps and other recorded information. Additionally, most jurisdictions also have a relatively current, high accuracy, digital, aerial orthophoto mosaic which can be viewed on the internet as an overlay on its Parcel GIS Map.
Many of these Parcel GIS Maps are now in the process of being rectified by ground data such that the corners and lines more closely agree with the aerial orthophoto mosaics and “ground truth.” Once rectified, these Parcel GIS Maps can produce state plane coordinates (and/or latitudes and longitudes) sufficient to produce boundary maps for most, if not all, boundary requirements.
Survey grade GPS allows for the use of this coordinate information to locate corners and lines on the ground. As this high grade GPS becomes more available to the public it is inevitable that within a short period of time this new technology will cause the traditional boundary surveys by licensed (registered) land surveyors to be unnecessary. Given these indisputable facts my questions are these:
1. Will land surveyors accept, understand and use this new technology?
2. How can land surveyors use this new technology to avoid becoming obsolete?
3. Is it too late for land surveyors to participate in these conversions?
4. Will the interrelated web of all of the parcels in these Parcel GIS Maps act to reduce litigation over disputed boundaries?
Ted Madson
April 19, 2012
before we get to your questions, lets dispute your indisputable facts.
a) without a national requirement for recording, each and every parcel will require a boundary survey to " be rectified" This will take decades.
b)there is no legal authority for a boundary survey to be replaced by a GIS in any state, much less all 50
c) in order to have a national cadastre, we will need to move to a Torrens title system
d) The existing laws governing boundaries will need to be replaced in each state.
I agree that some day we will have a national cadastre but to ring the death bell of boundary surveying is a bit premature. just my 2cents
and if the world was a perfectly flat piece of land and all those drawings (survey's and plats) were perfect... than maybe. But it isn't and the life the surveyor will continue.
I have been working the last several days to pull together 3 different subdivisions. ON paper, they look perfect and fit like a glove. But in the field, it is a whole different story. So should I use your rectified GIS ortho photo enhanced sketch to straighten those lines and make everything fit?
Ted you forgot a major question: Do counties want the massive increase in legal exposure for this? Of course not. Those counties that think they are capable of producing proper boundary surveys via GIS simply cannot. They just do not have the experience to understand the intricacies AND implications of boundary law.
I believe one needs to recognize there is much more to boundary law than making layers in ArcGIS snap together in parcel fabric with a suitable closure ratio.
When a county goes into a battle with "indisputable facts", they best make sure they have all of the facts. If they miss one important detail in the field or the chain of title they will quickly find themselves spending the equivalent to their budget for new photogrammetry every 3 years on one single expensive lawsuit... Are they ready for that risk? Most I know are very risk averse. :excruciating:
I provided one subdivision on SPCS to a GIS tech for the Town. He overlayed it and said, huh, our GIS is pretty close. He never updated the datalayer to match the actual survey, it was well beyond his budget.
I try to tie everything together, but that takes time. I have often said that I will be part of the generation that destroys surveying. Given the mass of the problem, it will not be destroyed until after I retire.
Will land surveyors accept, understand and use this new technology?
Does it really matter whether surveyor accepts or not? What really matters is if surveyors are part of the solution instead of part of the problem. You can either be part of the steam roller or part of the road.
How can land surveyors use this new technology to avoid becoming obsolete?
The land surveyor will need to join in and embrace the process. Once all the boundaries are fixed and adjudicated the repeated "resurvey" of boundaries would stop and that would be a good thing. Instead of stability of boundaries many surveyors have become a source of instability of boundaries. Pin cushions are evidence of this. Anybody that thinks the general public won't throw surveyors under the bus is not in touch with reality.
Is it too late for land surveyors to participate in these conversions?
No.
Will the interrelated web of all of the parcels in these Parcel GIS Maps act to reduce litigation over disputed boundaries?
Depends on whether an adjudication process that would eliminate the future litigation is put in place at the beginning. Such a process is possible and I don't believe it would be as hard to do as many believe.
Ted,
The items you mentioned are more likely to effect the surveyor as an expert measurer rather than the surveyor as an expert in boundary law. Coordinates will never control boundary lines over monuments, senior rights, and/or intent.
Regarding item #1. I think many surveyors are taking advantage of this "new" technology already.
Regarding item #2. The expert measurer who lacks knowledge in boundary law principles should be a little worried. However, expert measurers are needed to set up these Land Information Systems.
Regarding item #3. These new Parcel GIS Maps could possibly increase litigation if the professional land surveyor's opinion is not considered.
The parcel GIS maps are a great tool, but they are just that, a tool.
A torrens system does not guarantee extent of title in Ontario.
Derek
Ted posted a similar message in 2005 The GIS Boundary Issue and I still believe he is expressing the most extreme position to generate discussion. However, before you ignore what he says do your homework!! The truth will be closer to his position than you may want, but it is the truth. I have been following GIS development and the forces behind it since about 1980.
If you really want intelligent discussion start with U.S. Geologic Survey then search using "National Map Cadastral" The history lesson starts with the link "FINAL - The National Map Report" from November 2001. This is the national blueprint and is being followed.
Next important link is NGAC Discussion – Toward a National Geospatial Strategy this is the June 2010 update report. Take note of the subcommittee members presenting the report. Don't know the names, use Google just add GIS after the names!! Power Players is putting it mildly!!
Notice the previous link took you to the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). If it has location and Uncle Sam wants to know about it this is the GIS/CADD standards coordinating agency. More reading assignments from FGDC:
FGDC Structure and Federal Agency and Bureau Representation
Standards publications of special interest to surveyors, Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Geographic Information Framework Data Standard and of course the Cadastral Data Content Standard, FGDC-STD-003 This standard currently contains 3 parts.
I was a reviewer of the 1994 version containing a forth part. The fourth part was a data collection standard that could best be described as a check list for a complete an accurate boundary survey. Part four was eliminated, as I was told in 1995, "at the time of review, your comments and others led the subcommittee to abandon the collection standard. it was felt at that time a federal standard for collection would be too overwhelming and would not serve the ultimate goal of the committee which was then and continues to be to build cooperation and coordination with local, state and tribal governments."
FGDC, Cadastral Subcommittee Jan 2012 Report [PPT]
When your done with your homework come back and we can have that discussion.
> Ted posted a similar message in 2005 The GIS Boundary Issue and I still believe he is expressing the most extreme position to generate discussion. However, before you ignore what he says do your homework!! The truth will be closer to his position than you may want, but it is the truth. I have been following GIS development and the forces behind it since about 1980.
>
> If you really want intelligent discussion start with U.S. Geologic Survey then search using "National Map Cadastral" The history lesson starts with the link "FINAL - The National Map Report" from November 2001. This is the national blueprint and is being followed.
>
> Next important link is NGAC Discussion – Toward a National Geospatial Strategy this is the June 2010 update report. Take note of the subcommittee members presenting the report. Don't know the names, use Google just add GIS after the names!! Power Players is putting it mildly!!
>
> Notice the previous link took you to the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). If it has location and Uncle Sam wants to know about it this is the GIS/CADD standards coordinating agency. More reading assignments from FGDC:
>
> FGDC Structure and Federal Agency and Bureau Representation
>
> Standards publications of special interest to surveyors, Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Geographic Information Framework Data Standard and of course the Cadastral Data Content Standard, FGDC-STD-003 This standard currently contains 3 parts.
>
> I was a reviewer of the 1994 version containing a forth part. The fourth part was a data collection standard that could best be described as a check list for a complete an accurate boundary survey. Part four was eliminated, as I was told in 1995, "at the time of review, your comments and others led the subcommittee to abandon the collection standard. it was felt at that time a federal standard for collection would be too overwhelming and would not serve the ultimate goal of the committee which was then and continues to be to build cooperation and coordination with local, state and tribal governments."
>
> FGDC, Cadastral Subcommittee Jan 2012 Report [PPT]
>
> When your done with your homework come back and we can have that discussion.
:good:
Ted, I've reviewed the 5 posts you've made to this message board and can't help but notice a certain trollishness to them. What gives?
PHD = Piled High & Deep
> Ted, I've reviewed the 5 posts you've made to this message board and can't help but notice a certain trollishness to them. What gives?
Yes, post an absurd thread; then run. Ted M, really needs to get out in the field and see what we are up against.
As of right now, GIS is an excellant planning tool, but should not be used as a design tool. I have no doubt that ,eventually, GIS images will become accurate enough for design work, but I think that is 10 to 20 years away.
I cannot even see the implication that GIS data has "survey accuracy" at this time, or in the near future. That's "Salesman's Talk". (You know, those clowns from the survey supply company that will assure you that their GPS equipment will give x,y results to an accuracy that will be within the width of a dime on the ground, and if you stand that dime up on edge, the z value will be within that height. Yes, I had a salesman tell me that with a perfectly straight face.)
GIS is comming. It won't be the "be all, end all" within my lifetiome (I'm 65), but its proponents will tell you great stories about its capabilities. Look, all these salesman and the professors and their college students have to eat too you know. How far will they get down the dinner table if they tell the absolute facts about the equipment and proceedures? Cut them some slack guys. Just realise what you are hearing and take it for what it is worth.
I can only conclude that Mr. Manson is not a boundary surveyor, for he has missed one of the most fundamental principles of boundary surveying. Therefor this post does not warrant further comment.
