.
Pretty much. The idea that anything outside of "true boundary work" is beneath us and should be tossed over to civil engineers is flawed. It's also asking for us to get even more siloed and shut out of things that really should be in our wheelhouse.
?ÿ
No one is suggesting that non boundary work is beneath us, or that we should turn it over civil engineers. The point being made, is that if it weren't for boundaries there would be no reason for a separate licensed proffesion. The early 20'th century status quo of surveys being carried out by engineers would have been fine.
Great to hear all the thoughts on these proposed rule changes here in Oregon.?ÿ I hope that those involved with Oregon thoughtfully engage with PLSO, OSBEELS, or other appropriate venues.?ÿ @jered-mcgrath-pls had some good points, thanks for that.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ
You cannot compare portability of medical and surveying licenses.
Removing an appendix in Oregon does not require me to understand the historical, constituional and regulatory diffferences between Oregon and any other State I work in. International versus US survey feet won't move a particular organ to a significantly different location in a given body (though it may be measurable in my first ex).
With a few changes we can improve license portability and protection of the public. The current trend is to sacrifice the latter in favor of the former. Choose your analogies with care.
And then let the 15000 engineers start dipping manholes. We need more of that help rather than lobbying us out of existence or pigeon holing us into a technical support role and stripping our true basis of being
I respect engineering, appreciate architecture, but we've been towing the line of the dirty work long enough and I don't care how many whiny voices they have
What makes you think some of those 15,000 PEs are not dipping manholes or doing some of the dirty work involved with development projects??ÿ Or that there are not an equal proportion of PLSs that also choose to not do the dirty work??ÿ That is not a PE vs PLS thing, that is an individual attitude thing.?ÿ I know many PLSs that wouldn't think of doing the dirty work once they get in the office environment and I know many PEs who jump at the chance to get out and do some dirty work because they are stuck in the office all the time.?ÿ Many times, the PE who was 1/2 owner of a company I worked for would go out and do all the depth measures and paint the manhole info on the manhole and all we survey techs had to do was shoot the rim and record the painted MH number.?ÿ I was teaching at a university and running my personal company at the same time so I always had boots in my vehicle: a PE who started teaching about the same time always had boots in his vehicle as well and was always explaining to students that you needed to have appropriate field clothes available because you never know when you'll need to get out on site and get your hands dirty.?ÿ I'm also familiar with many surveying technicians who whine about the physical and dirty aspect of the job, yet they choose to show up for work.?ÿ Heck, even I gripe about the dirty work sometimes, but it still gets done.
How many licensed morticians are there in the country?
They don't have to team up for more political presence and don't see[m] to be fading away.
We should be more like them,
Well, for Kentucky, it looks like a pretty equal number of funeral director/embalmers as land surveyors.?ÿ BUT how many other professions have an interest in getting a piece of that pie at all??ÿ How many other professions already do some aspect of what they do??ÿ I cannot think of a single other profession that might be invested in that profession (perhaps professional vampires, but there are probably even fewer of them).?ÿ It is not just a matter of numbers, but competing interests.?ÿ That is the politics of it that surveyors would do well to understand.
this discipline is unlike anything else because of it's breadth of knowledge and physical requirements etc to just get across the line to license.
BS.?ÿ I am proud to be a surveyor and worked hard to get the license, but there are other professions that require as much knowledge and as much physical effort.?ÿ Some of those professions will lean more one way or the other in the knowledge/physical areas.?ÿ The nurses you spoke of have a physically demanding job and a pretty broad depth of knowledge needed (yeah, some of them stand around the nurse's station not doing much, but we have those surveyors as well).?ÿ We (surveyors) can complain about dipping a manhole for a topo - how do you think nurses feel about it when that phrase is just a little more literal!?ÿ Despite a huge amount of ego on the matter, we (surveyors) are not some singular and irreplaceable profession.?ÿ The sooner surveyors realize that, the sooner they will appreciate the coalitions that support the profession (which generally includes engineers).
Step back,this isnt a personal attack toward you, you seem to be taking it that way, my apologies.?ÿ
This is a discussion of where we've gotten to as a licensed profession, and where we need to be headed.
And I've never seen nor heard of a nonsurveyor Engineer EVER volunteering to dip a manhole, but I am not against it either.
That is the politics of it that surveyors would do well to understand.
And no way.?ÿ
If we cant be a self supporting licensed profession, then let us disappear.
We can work together without being included in other professional licensure pools, esp if only to allow the government ease of familiarity to the process, and join in the political and longer game discussions.?ÿ
Doctors dont get to dictate the nursing profession, just have a different and seperate license, in the same arena. Similar to perfussionists.
THis is a great discussion.?ÿ Paradigm changes rarely go painlessly, but more pain occurs when you're anchored too heavily into the past and not seeing the forest for the trees. IMNSHO.
@jitterboogie Nothing was taken as a personal attack.?ÿ It is, in fact, a discussion and I just pointed out where and why I disagree with several of your premises - including where we need to be headed.?ÿ Breaking off from joint boards is not a wise decision unless there are the numbers and political clout to survive such a split.?ÿ IMO, That is not going to be the case in most of the states right now.
Many PEs (not dual licensees) get their hands dirty in many more aspects of development such as boring, inspections, material testing, etc...?ÿ You may just have not been around any of those individuals, but there a many out there.
Thats good, because I can accidentally engage adversarially and gotoo far before i know it.
Absolutely! Its a great discussion.
I'm around the field CEs lots and others in the structural area too.?ÿ I was taking a pot shot at the larger body of engineers as a whole. Cheap shot yes, but fairly accurate based on the numbers, YMMV.
We can agree to disagree based on the longer career view of the field you have that I'll always be deficient in years to, but I have a few careers that I've experienced the tying of hands and limits of workflow/advancement or even retardation/retraction so I'd hate to see us be forced to always be allied to others when we cantruly stand alone, by statutes and by value and even political clout if it has to come by that.?ÿ
I'll buy you a beer or a coffee first chance i can to sit down with you and discuss more, and learn the whole time I'm doing so too.
Carry on!
?ÿ
The Board regulating licensure of Land Surveyors in the various States only exist because the Legislature has determined that is in the best interest of the citizens of that State.?ÿ How the Legislature allows that to be operated and funded is their decision, not ours.?ÿ We can beg and we can plead, but the Legislature is always seeking ways to accomplish goals by spending less money.?ÿ Combining various professional groups under one umbrella Board is less expensive.?ÿ We have Engineers, Architects, Landscape Architects, Geologists and Land Surveyors under such an umbrella Board.?ÿ Here are recent Kansas numbers for each profession.?ÿ Note that 80 percent of those controlled by this Board are Engineers.?ÿ The cost to have five separate boards with offices and support staff would appear improper to legislators.
?ÿ
License Type 5/31/2021 5/31/2022
Individuals Number of Licenses Number of Licenses
Architect 1,987 1,823
Engineer 12,062 11,989
Geologist 413 340
Landscape Architect 331 330
Land Surveyor 632 540
TOTAL 15,425 15,022
Note that the gradual decrease in the total matches the gradual decrease in each profession.?ÿ Another reason legislators use to justify keeping these, and possibly more in the future, professions under a single umbrella board.
If we cant be a self supporting licensed profession, then let us disappear.
And that is exactly what would be more likely to happen.
Doctors and nurses have separate licenses, but if there were enough doctors such that hospitals could cover the nurses duties with a doctor - there would be no nurses.?ÿ Earlier in this thread, someone pointed out that engineers used to do boundary surveying as well - there is nothing that stops them from reaching for that now except cooperation with professional surveyors and surveying societies.
We (surveyors) in Kentucky have seats on the Board of Licensure specifically reserved for a survey representative (probably a little disproportionately in favor of surveyors based on licensed member numbers).?ÿ We have a seat at the table, we are heavily involved in decisions affecting surveying in the state and we're pretty well backed by the PE side of the board.?ÿ If that is not the case in your state, a wiser course of action would be to work towards that type of relationship rather than taking your ball and going home; because the game will continue with or without you.
t now except cooperation with professional surveyors and surveying societies.
No,its codified in laws.
And Doctors cant do what nurses do(and vice versa nor want to either) they dont have time nor the personalities.?ÿ Don't offend both fields by statements like that.?ÿ I grew up in both camps, so I have unique experiencesto pull from in this part of the discussion.
We have a seat at the table,
We need a seat at their table when needed, and vice versa. We also need and have our own too, thankfully its codified.
?ÿ
im not buying the 640k land surveyors. unless that for all of history.?ÿ we only had about 40k licenses a few years ago, so that number seems a bit high.
ANd well, screw the politicians.?ÿ Bloviating gas bags of dishonesty and sacrilege. Theyre the most fiscally irresponsible career field of all, so we need to vote better, better yet, vote for a surveyor!
No No No
Each number is for a different date.?ÿ There were 632 licensed land surveyors on May 31, 2021.?ÿ That number fell to only 540 exactly one year later on May 31, 2022.
The 2023 budget for the Kansas State Board of Technical Professions is $792,091.?ÿ That addresses the 15,022 total individuals served by that board.?ÿ Trying to have an identical bureaucracy for only 540 individuals would appear to be unreasonable.
No,its codified in laws.
Stated in a thread about proposed changes to a law.?ÿ SMH
The point should have been very clear, but more plainly - with very minimal effort, the political influence of any one of the more influential groups that have any ancillary interests in our profession could change that law to remove licensure requirements for surveying (something that has been tried in several states), reduce licensure requirements for surveying (something that has occurred in many states), or could very easily open the door to other "qualified" people to licensure (and since engineering is already an accepted degree that is a very easy argument as to who could also do surveying).
And Doctors cant do what nurses do(and vice versa nor want to either) they dont have time nor the personalities.?ÿ Don't offend both fields by statements like that.
First, there was an IF at the beginning of my statement which should indicate it is a purely hypothetical as the number of doctors would not realistically reach such a level.?ÿ However, claiming a doctor could not do what nurses do is not an always accurate statement.?ÿ My uncles were often teaching procedural items to their nurses.?ÿ Just last year, I got to spend a few nights in the hospital after an operation and several of the nurses commented on the surgeon I had being such a great teacher and having trained them how to do several different items.?ÿ That claim is just as false as anyone claiming that engineers couldn't do land surveying - because there are some that can do it as well as land surveyors and there are many more that can do it at least as well as the surveyor you always hate to follow behind's work.
We're going to have a fun time with beer coffee or just a deck of cards im sure of it.
?ÿ
?ÿ
This has been a HUGE mother THRAC.
So do we know what the direction of the Oregon issue is going, or has this THRAC gone so far off the rails that its developed its own gravitational force now??ÿ
????
thank you.?ÿ I was suspicious of that, i just didnt look closely enough.?ÿ whew.
because there are some that can do it as well as
also tread lightly here......
remember this guy:
?ÿ
?ÿ
he flew that plane for well over an hour, doesnt mean he was doing it, and definitely wasn't legal.?ÿ Just like if an engineer or a carpenter decided to go rogue and just " survey a little" because who's going to know...
?ÿ
THrac on.
I need to go on vacation more, this has been fun!
well. How many Morticians are there in Kansas? Do they get a board??ÿ Bunch of stiffs probably.
because there are some that can do it as well as
also tread lightly here......
Just like if an engineer or a carpenter decided to go rogue and just " survey a little" because who's going to know...
There is no need to tread lightly on the subject.?ÿ My statement is historical fact in most states.?ÿ I would venture to bet that pretty much any licensee on this board could very quickly pull up from memory the name of an engineer who did very good survey work and an engineer who did very poor survey work prior to surveying licensing laws coming into being in their state (or even after such laws when grandfathering of licensees happened).
Fair enough.?ÿ although its still not legal now, which is what i was getting at.?ÿ And based on the claw back nature of legal battles and liability, should they be held liable post event like recently licensed surveyors or should they be immune if they did survey badly or poorly??ÿ THis is getting into a whole other universe, I fell like we need to sell tickets and we can split the proceeds.
Remember, never argue with an idiot, I'll drag you down to my level and beat you with experience...
???? ???? ???? ????ÿ
