> We had opportunities to be vigilant and we failed to act on them, that's all I'm saying.
Sure, vigilance is what elections are about, but I don't think that land surveyors are a majority of the electorate on any day.
> > It's the art of surveying, the craft, the trade, that I like about surveying, and calling it a profession doesn't make it one.
>
> This points out exactly how doomed the occupation of surveying is. Is it a trade? a craft? Apparently not a profession by a long shot...I guarantee landscape architects, geologists, engineers, etc aren't struggling with even knowing what their practice is or isn't - there can't possibly be any kind of unification with such diverging beliefs on what surveyors even are or should be.
Boundary Surveying is a Profession because Boundary Surveyors deal with abstract concepts (they apply principles of boundary law). The only people who have identity problems about land surveying are the high school diploma crowd. Geologists, Landscape Architects and Engineers are all individuals with degrees so there's no identity crisis.
Actually land surveying is more of a profession than engineering because a lot of engineering these days is boiler plate. Engineering is more technical and less professional, not at all abstract.
Regional licensing, especially in regards to Boundary surveying would be extremely difficult to implement.
Established case law and statutes in multiple states condensed into one regulatory body.
Nice thought, but impossible in my opinion.
In a sense, I am saying that, but we have to be a lobby to do that, not a voter block. There's little room, especially these days, in a lowball Survey-for-Mortgage business for funds to create a formidable lobby. Our current lobby in Florida mostly suits Engineering & Contracting Firms with Surveyor service offering.
The way to have done that was to force municipalities (Florida I'm speaking of here) into universally applying our code to the public instead of cherry-picking the code to their advantage. I do realize though, it was partly a product of extremely busy times, most of us didn't want the headache of dealing with smaller permitting Surveys, & subsequently we didn't see part of the potential problem that could arise from neglecting this.
> Boundary Surveying is a Profession because Boundary Surveyors deal with abstract concepts (they apply principles of boundary law). The only people who have identity problems about land surveying are the high school diploma crowd. Geologists, Landscape Architects and Engineers are all individuals with degrees so there's no identity crisis.
>
> Actually land surveying is more of a profession than engineering because a lot of engineering these days is boiler plate. Engineering is more technical and less professional, not at all abstract.
Excellent Points, True
Ralph
UF grads don't typically work in the Mortgage arena, and so they only benefit Contractors, Engineers & Government as clients and/or employers. When the economy flopped, they were left out of work, hence the "glut". Their lobby however, remained very much intact, but they only lobby for 1/2 the profession, and really didn't have much of an interest in knowing whether the other 1/2 was being treated unfairly by municipalities, clients, or the public for that matter. Suffice it to say that their lobby got things done for them, the rest of us couldn't keep up, because we couldn't fall back on a large firm's resources.
I still believe exclusivity for the degree was, & still is, a very bad idea.
> I still believe exclusivity for the degree was, & still is, a very bad idea.
Sir as long as you and others cling to your belief then surveying will self destruct by its own cause and the spoils swallowed up by the specialist vultures.
We were fortunate in South Australia to have unity from all the then traditionally trained licensed surveyors to see the value of the introduction of the surveying degree nearly 50 years ago!
The university degree ensures a broad based education that can not possibly be provided by a single mentor. Graduates then enter the work force to specialize in one or two surveying disciplines under the mentoring of an expereince person in that field of surveying.
RADU
You say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to ...
>"It's the art of surveying, the craft, the trade, that I like about surveying, and >calling it a profession doesn't make it one."
That's a sad and ignorant statement to come from a surveyor. The "art" in the description of surveying in the same sense that law is an "art". It refers to the mental reasoning, the application of the abstract principles of that come from law as opposed to the scientific principles of measurement and mathematics. Surveying is both an art and a science.
The craft of surveying? I guess this would be the skill one uses in finding monuments and other physical evidence in the field, in planning fieldwork for minimal effort and maximum efficiency. Maybe it also refers to the ability to provide staking in a more useful manner than most. It would also be the skill or artistic ability, in the aesthetic sense, to create a map which is both informative and pleasing to the eye. These things represent the "field sense" that some have and some don't.
The trade of surveying can only refer to the strictly technical applications and labor of surveying. A skilled tradesman has the ability to do his work in a thorough and efficient manner. The skilled tradesman knows how to use the tools of his trade and how to get the most out of them in the work that he does. Again, some have this ability and some don't.
The professional "art" of surveying is the ability to not only apply principles to a particular problem, but to fully understand those principles, to decide which are applicable and which aren't. It incorporates the ability to apply principles in unique but valid ways. The professional has the ability to not only do the work, but to be able to effectively communicate and explain that work to a variety of audiences ranging from other professional well acquianted with the ideas involved, to those who may not even have a rudimentary understanding of the work performed, much less the principles behind it.
The professional may not always have the same skill with a tool as the tradesman, or the aesthetic eye or ability to find evidence quite as well as some of the best craftsmen, but he understands the capabilities of the tools and can envision new applications for existing tools to solve not just how to get a task done, but how to achieve success in a project, and understands the relative importance of evidence and the subtleties of the application of law to it that the craftsman does not fully grasp.
The "art" of surveying does not refer to the ability to draft a beautiful map or stamp a brass cap and place the monument so that it is practically an aesthetic landscape feature, it refers to the mental aspects which require a great deal of specialized training and experience in their application, which is a hallmark of all professions.
Surveying does have both trade and craft aspects to it, and they are important, but don't think that just because you do not practice it at the professional level that it is not a profession. It most certainly is a profession by every serious definition of the word. The fact that our Boards largely test for technical ability and very often license technicians, allowing them to call themselves Professional Land Surveyors, has had the unfortunate effect of diluting the professional ranks of surveying. We license technicians, hoping they will grow into being professionals, but it happens too often that they choose to remain technicians throughout their careers while insisting they are professionals. For many skilled technicians, the license has only represented the key to better pay, and little more.
> In a sense, I am saying that, but we have to be a lobby to do that, not a voter block.
Exactly right. The California Land Surveyors Association has a very active and (mostly) effective Legislative Committee. We have hired a very good lobbyist to represent us at the capital, which I think helps tremendously.
>
> The way to have done that was to force municipalities (Florida I'm speaking of here) into universally applying our code to the public instead of cherry-picking the code to their advantage. I do realize though, it was partly a product of extremely busy times, most of us didn't want the headache of dealing with smaller permitting Surveys, & subsequently we didn't see part of the potential problem that could arise from neglecting this.
Local governments, and often state agencies as well, often enable (usually out of ignorance) people to circumvent licensing laws when they submit applications for building permits, encroachment permits, site plans, etc. for approval. These agencies accept "survey" work performed by unlicensed contractors, drafting services, or landowners who have hand drawn additional existing and proposed features on an older stamped plan or map prepared for some other purpose by an engineer or surveyor.
IMO, the heads of these agencies, or reviewing groups within the agencies are licensed engineers and should be held accountable for the negligence of their staff who enable blatant violations to take place.
I maintain the four year degree has kept our competion, new surveyors, out of the way too effectively for our own good. There simply aren't enough new surveyors coming into our industry.
That's what the politicians want, more entrants into our industry. And they're the ones that decide our licensing requirements, not us. We give them what they want, or they take what they want.
Well said! Curtis Brown had a better grasp on the professionalism of surveying some 50+ yrs ago than todays practioners. Yet here people are, 21st century, kicking & screaming against calling it anything more than a trade or vocation. How do we wonder why our image & situation is such as it is?
> I maintain the four year degree has kept our competion, new surveyors, out of the way too effectively for our own good. There simply aren't enough new surveyors coming into our industry.
> That's what the politicians want, more entrants into our industry. And they're the ones that decide our licensing requirements, not us. We give them what they want, or they take what they want.
I fail to understand how this is remotely germane to the situation - in case you haven't noticed, across the US, there isn't enough work to go around. There isn't a surplus of surveyors in the industry per se, just a surplus of surveyors looking for work! Having more coming into this industry thru whatever requirements (degree, no degree) would only result in more lowballers / jacklegs than presently exist, and actually add support to deregulation.
> Boundary Surveying is a Profession because Boundary Surveyors deal with abstract concepts (they apply principles of boundary law). The only people who have identity problems about land surveying are the high school diploma crowd. Geologists, Landscape Architects and Engineers are all individuals with degrees so there's no identity crisis.
I am calling bullcrap on that one! It is the degreed people who have an identity problem. I do not give a rip what a lawyer, an engineer, a landscape architect or a geologist thinks of me. I have a license that says that I am a PROFESSIONAL land surveyor. So if they do not think me a professional, they can kiss my behind!
On the other hand, those wringing their hands that we must have a degree requirement constantly worry what other professions think. Kind of like your comment above about what the Geologists, Landscape Architects and Engineers think. It does not matter. They live how they want to, I live how I want to. And when they need something, they have to pay me bank to get my signature. Bottom line, they need me so they can think whatever they want...as long as they are paying me money!
> The fact that our Boards largely test for technical ability and very often license technicians, allowing them to call themselves Professional Land Surveyors, has had the unfortunate effect of diluting the professional ranks of surveying. We license technicians, hoping they will grow into being professionals, but it happens too often that they choose to remain technicians throughout their careers while insisting they are professionals. For many skilled technicians, the license has only represented the key to better pay, and little more.
And attitudes like this one is what makes us see that you so called "professionals" need to learn what being a professional is. Because you just come off as a jack @ss!!!!!
Sorry about your bad luck. I see you're back to try to kick more dirt in Florida surveyor's faces while we were down. Maybe some day Georgia will go through this, I can return the favor, but I'd like to think I'd have more class than that.
Pseudo, that is a great name for you. After all, you are a pattently FALSE. Your actions and your words speak the truth of that statement. You look down on those who do not have a degree. That makes you UNprofessional.
When did that happen? I said I support the degree requirement ... I support it for many reasons, and not one of those reasons is "so I can look down on surveyors without a degree". If you can find where I posted anything of the like, just cut and paste it here, PLEASE.
Are you saying that you know guys who are not licensed because they do not have a degree that are wholly competent to do the job of a licensed surveyor? What would you say about a guy with a degree who has never stepped outside of the office in 4 yrs but only did CAD being allowed to sit for his license in Florida? Is this the kind of person you deem a professional?
> Are you saying that you know guys who are not licensed because they do not have a degree that are wholly competent to do the job of a licensed surveyor? What would you say about a guy with a degree who has never stepped outside of the office in 4 yrs but only did CAD being allowed to sit for his license in Florida? Is this the kind of person you deem a professional?
Not meaning to step in front of TPR, but I distinctly remember the magnifying glass used over 20 years ago to scan my numerous reference and experience verification forms included with my app for license/exam. I can assure you a balance between field and office time was required. ALL routine AND responsible time had to be verified.