> Really???
>
> I'd like to see that enforced.
In Maryland construction stake out falls under the statutory definition of practicing land surveying. They state doesn't have to worry about unlicensed practice because the construction companies can hire a licensed land surveyor with 30 years of experience for what they would pay an assistant project manager five years out of college.
Yeah, I've read those definitions. My take is it says what surveyors do and we do all those sorts of things. So do many, many others do all kinds of such measurements. I saw a ad on TV where if you want a new bathroom remodel they layout some marks on the wall and counter, take a bunch of pictures and I assume use the same technology to make all the measurements and build a custom fit tub surround to install. Same stuff, so is this surveying without a license?
In my opinion what should require a license and regulation is the things that require a high degree of education, experience and ultimately professional judgement to provide some service to the public (not the black and white but the gray areas). Just applying this technology doesn't stand up in my view.
Licensing aside, you should get hired to do some job because you can do it better than most others. Those that hire professionals have some obligation to sort out the qualifications of those they hire. Assuming a license can remove these obligations from contracting parties is little more than wishful thinking.
.
>
> Licensing aside, you should get hired to do some job because you can do it better than most others. Those that hire professionals have some obligation to sort out the qualifications of those they hire. Assuming a license can remove these obligations from contracting parties is little more than wishful thinking.
Absolutely Ridge, you would assume that the Client is going to select the best method of verifying these quantities, but if not who cares?
Since when does any BOR dictate methods means or qualifications upon industry? Moreover, how does verifying stockpile quantities fall under construction stakeout?
Let's take an example:
I sign a contract to survey a golf course with Donald Trump (not too far from the truth :)). Donald believes that Ron Jeremy has a good eye for determining quantities, therefore The contract stipulates that when it comes to determining quantities, Ron Jeremy will be flown in from the set at the San Fernando Valley to NYC and Ron will eyeball the stockpile and be deemed the final judge of the quantity. I sign on the dotted line and so does Donald, we now have an executed contract. How does some bureaucrat jump out of the bleachers to tell either me or Donald that this should be done by a certified photogramatrist or a licensed Surveyor?
> The contract stipulates that when it comes to determining quantities, Ron Jeremy will be flown in from the set at the San Fernando Valley to NYC and Ron will eyeball the stockpile and be deemed the final judge of the quantity. I sign on the dotted line and so does Donald, we now have an executed contract. How does some bureaucrat jump out of the bleachers to tell either me or Donald that this should be done by a certified photogramatrist or a licensed Surveyor?
It would be fine if the contract stated that Ron Jeremy is to be the arbiter of the charges to be assessed for the dirt moved, but if it says that he is to determine the quantity of dirt, then -- in California, at least -- that falls within the definition of land surveying.
LRDay wrote:
> I saw a ad on TV where if you want a new bathroom remodel they layout some marks on the wall and counter, take a bunch of pictures and I assume use the same technology to make all the measurements and build a custom fit tub surround to install. Same stuff, so is this surveying without a license?
No, not under California law. The contractor isn't delivering measurements to the client, he's taking measurements for his own use in producing the finished work.
The key distinction in all of these examples is whether or not the vendor is offering to deliver measurements, which -- again, under California law -- is within the definition of land surveying.
Jim,
I totally disagree, moreover I doubt it can be enforced. If that's the case my girlfriend shouldn't be using a laser to hang picture frames in her interior business.
Show me a case where this was actually enforced, If it were out here there would be a precedent setting case Under restraint of trade.
BTW, Ron is originally from New York but I believe he lives in California.
😀 😀 😀
> If that's the case my girlfriend shouldn't be using a laser to hang picture frames in her interior business.
Again, your girlfriend isn't selling measurements, she's selling installed pictures. If picture-hanging measurements were considered important to the health and welfare of the public, then they'd be candidates for inclusion under the definition of land surveying.
This subject varies by state, of course. Some states don't include construction staking under their statutory definitions of land surveying, others do. Some don't include topographic surveying, others do. Some don't include geodetic positioning, others do. So offering to determine stockpile quantities will have to be interpreted according to the laws of the state in which the work is located.
> > If that's the case my girlfriend shouldn't be using a laser to hang picture frames in her interior business.
>
> Again, your girlfriend isn't selling measurements, she's selling installed pictures. If picture-hanging measurements were considered important to the health and welfare of the public, then they'd be candidates for inclusion under the definition of land surveying.
>
> This subject varies by state, of course. Some states don't include construction staking under their statutory definitions of land surveying, others do. Some don't include topographic surveying, others do. Some don't include geodetic positioning, others do. So offering to determine stockpile quantities will have to be interpreted according to the laws of the state in which the work is located.
Once again, you have yet to show me a case where this interpretation of yours was enforced and stood up in a court of law or went unchallenged.
Ralph
Whether Jim decides to waste his time trying to find a precedent setting case is irrelevant. I believe the point he is making is that determining stock pile volumes in his state as well as mine is considered the practice of land surveying. I believe his comments about "selling measurements" as opposed to using measurements is right on target.
BTW: How is your weather? We have sunny skies and 60 degree temps here. Come on out for a visit if your feet are frozen.
It's actually snowing outside, thanks for the invite. I'll make it out there eventually. 🙂
I believe both you and Jim are are reading into it way too much. And unless somebody can point to an instance where this interpretation has been reported and enforced (ie censure, cease and desist order or something similar) I'm not buying it.
No disrespect to either you or Jim, but it just makes no sense to me. Here's another scenario.
Ron and I are neighbors and we can't figure out where our property line is. We come to a mutual agreement of where it is and both decide to abide by it. You as a Licensed Surveyor come by and say we're wrong and report us to the BOR. What happens next??
Well I guess we will have to part without agreeing.
The spare bedroom is available. 😉
Your last example sounds like "boundary by agreement" which is an accepted practice in some jurisdictions.
If I hear back from our BOR, I'll left ya know what they said. Never hurts to ask. Who knows, maybe they will agree with you.
> Ron and I are neighbors and we can't figure out where our property line is. We come to a mutual agreement of where it is and both decide to abide by it. You as a Licensed Surveyor come by and say we're wrong and report us to the BOR. What happens next??
Nothing happens next -- no one offered to practice land surveying. This wasn't about measurements, it was about where two principals agreed to locate their common boundary. (Of course, the mortgage holder on one of the properties might successfully challenge the agreement as nonbinding, and the public agency with zoning jurisdiction might have something to say about it, but those are unrelated matters.)
As John said, I'm not able to spend the time to look through all the enforcement cases in California to ferret out one that covers stockpile measurement, but if the iPhone app method comes to light in California, a complaint will be filed (I'd be happy to file it), and I'm pretty confident the service would be found to be in violation.
No Problem John,
Thanks Again for the invite 🙂
> > Ron and I are neighbors and we can't figure out where our property line is. We come to a mutual agreement of where it is and both decide to abide by it. You as a Licensed Surveyor come by and say we're wrong and report us to the BOR. What happens next??
>
> Nothing happens next -- no one offered to practice land surveying. This wasn't about measurements, it was about where two principals agreed to locate their common boundary. (Of course, the mortgage holder on one of the properties might successfully challenge the agreement as nonbinding, and the public agency with zoning jurisdiction might have something to say about it, but those are unrelated matters.)
>
> As John said, I'm not able to spend the time to look through all the enforcement cases in California to ferret out one that covers stockpile measurement, but if the iPhone app method comes to light in California, a complaint will be filed (I'd be happy to file it), and I'm pretty confident the service would be found to be in violation
That's fine, I still think you're grasping for straws. If found in violation, what happens to someone (unlicensed) who utilizes this method to determine stockpiles and is in turn reported to the board?
In the original post the land surveyor is hiring another person to do calculations for him, so it is up to the land surveyor to determine if he will accept what is done. His is the only liability.
The 400 yards (which is quite a bit of error by the way, probably $1200 or so), the fact that there is no provision for the large face of the pile and the really inaccurate baseline would preclude me from using this service. Maybe it could be used as a back-up service for a sanity check.
If Trimble ever gets the V10 going, there would be is something I would be interested in.
> In the original post the land surveyor is hiring another person to do calculations for him, so it is up to the land surveyor to determine if he will accept what is done. His is the only liability.
>
> The 400 yards (which is quite a bit of error by the way, probably $1200 or so), the fact that there is no provision for the large face of the pile and the really inaccurate baseline would preclude me from using this service. Maybe it could be used as a back-up service for a sanity check.
>
> If Trimble ever gets the V10 going, there would be is something I would be interested in.
For clarification, I am not hiring this company.
I had the opportunity to watch the demo and then, after the fact, I was asked to make a check of the quantities.
I would never certify the quantities that someone else had derived, no mater what method they'd used.
It really doesn't matter what anyone believes until a board decides this is or isnt under the definition. Should they decide it is and the company sues, it will take awhile to work its way through the courts. New technology always challenges old rules. Seems like an amazing technology to estimate quantities. NY tried to include GIS locations of fire hydrants under its definition of surveying, but that got shot down by the courts. Most of these definitions seem to remain untested as the cost to litigate is high.
I would never certify the quantities that someone else had derived, no mater what method they'd used.
I kinda figured you were just checking it out;-)
It is very interesting, but still, you took 500 shots on the pile, and I had no doubt you were using those values. An aside,,,,did you have the bottom? I know lots of our work with piles we do, but lots we don't, hate it when we don't:-(
My point was that if a surveyor uses a service like that the numbers are still the surveyors. Cant disclaim them.
>did you have the bottom? I know lots of our work with piles we do, but lots we don't, hate it when we don't
No, no bottom as this was a rogue pile outside of any of our stockpile sites where we topo'd existing ground before piles were made. Of course, the iPhone measurements are going to calculate volumes of the pile based on the perimeter of the pile comprising the "existing ground", so our comparisons in this situation should be consistent. I know for a fact that this area is flat - no big bumps or dips that would amount to much.
I hate getting those calls for pile volumes on a site I've never been to. They always say, "we put it on a really flat area", then you get out there and it clearly isn't all that flat. Of course the big face of the pile is the bottom face and anything a little off there can make quite a bit of yardage.
I spoke with this company 2 years ago about this software and your right -very nice people. They did offer to do a demo for us to check with an alternate method. They were going to call next time they were in the area and I never heard back.
At that time, they did not have information such as you provided above, which made me wonder...They also did not have the pricing figured out.
Very interesting stuff.
