As a public service to Texas registrants, here is the definition of the activity known as "professional surveying" as actually defined in the Professional Land Surveying Act codified as Sec. 1071.002 of the Texas Occupations Code.
I've diagrammed the definition for clarity since it turns out that some Texas surveyors have never really considered what the words of the statute actually say. The statutory definition is a mess, without a doubt, but the law says what it says:
"Professional surveying" means
the practice of land, boundary, or property surveying or other similar professional practices.
The term includes:
(A) performing any service or work the adequate performance of which involves applying special knowledge of the principles of
..1).. geodesy,
..2).. mathematics,
..3).. related applied and physical sciences, and
..4).. relevant laws
to the measurement or location of
..1) sites,
..2) points,
..3) lines,
..4) angles,
..5) elevations,
..6) natural features, and
..7) existing man-made works
..1) in the air,
..2) on the earth's surface,
..3) within underground workings, and
..4) on the beds of bodies of water to determine areas and volumes
for:
..1) locating real property boundaries;
..2) platting and laying out land and subdivisions of land; or
..3) preparing and perpetuating maps, record plats, field note records, easements, and real property descriptions that represent those surveys;
and
(B)
i)....consulting,
ii)...investigating,
iii)..evaluating,
iv)...analyzing,
v)....planning,
vi)...providing an expert surveying opinion or testimony,
vii)..acquiring survey data,
viii).preparing technical reports, and
ix)...mapping
to the extent those acts are performed in connection with acts described by this subdivision.
Yes, the definition is a mess, but that is what it actually says.
Kent, your point being...?
> your point being...?
The point is that the meanings of the words and phrases of this definition are the primary legal basis for determining what the licensed activity in Texas consists of. The definition has a complicated structure that is exposed by diagramming as I have done above.
In a thread below, some misinformed Texas surveyors wanted to believe that the preparation of FEMA elevation certificates, for example, fell within the definition of professional surveying because the word "elevations" appears within the definition. This diagrammatic form clearly shows how far off the mark that understanding of the statute falls.
Kent, you are deep man....don't you know it depends on what the definition of "is" is.
> don't you know it depends on what the definition of "is" is.
No, actually it doesn't, and for the obvious reason.
Kent
Do you remember an issue another surveyor had with the Texas BOR over a blown elevation certificate? If I recall correctly the Board went after him after the Flood Plain Manager filed a complaint against him.
Ralph
I understand now. Based on my understanding of Ga.definitions of what services fall under "surveying" I'd guess most state statutes are equally ambiguous and miscombobulated. I don't even care anymore.
Kent
> Do you remember an issue another surveyor had with the Texas BOR over a blown elevation certificate? If I recall correctly the Board went after him after the Flood Plain Manager filed a complaint against him.
I can recall him mentioning it, but I don't remember any details.
And I, for one, have a firm grasp of the obvious.
Don
> Based on my understanding of Ga.definitions of what services fall under "surveying" I'd guess most state statutes are equally ambiguous and miscombobulated.
They shouldn't be, though. If there actually is a need for an activity to be licensed, it should be possible to describe what that activity consists of. I happen to know from long experience that there is a definite public interest in only allowing competent land surveyors to offer our services to the public. So it ought to be possible to say unambiguously what those services are that the public has an interest in allowing only qualified individuals to offer.
Maybe this puts me in your "idiot" category, but isn't an elevation considered "survey data" in Texas? It is in my world. Just because it doesn't relate to a boundary doesn't mean it isn't survey data does it? Again, read the statute as if A wasn't there and it seems reasonable to interpret the statute to mean that determining elevations is surveying. The statute is messed up, there's no doubt of that, but what state statute involving surveying isn't? What do legislatures know about what we do?
To me, this appears to be another in a long series of threads that turn into arguments about angels on the head of a pin. Is there some practical reason to deny that determining elevations is surveying? FEMA thinks it is or they would let anybody off the street sign an elevation certificate and stamp it with their ____.
> And I, for one, have a firm grasp of the obvious.
Then you'll have recognized that the word "is" appears nowhere in the statutory definition. :>
> ... isn't an elevation considered "survey data" in Texas? It is in my world. Just because it doesn't relate to a boundary doesn't mean it isn't survey data does it?
Sure, the measurements by which elevations are determined are survey data in Texas, but they aren't "professional surveying" as defined by the licensing statute and subject to regulation under it unless they deal with property boundaries.
Kent
OK, this is my final answer. I'm not redacting, just condensing.
"Professional surveying" means
the practice of land, boundary, or property surveying or other similar professional practices. The term includes:(B)vii)..acquiring survey data.
If you think A applies to B, fine. I don't.
Kent
> OK, this is my final answer. I'm not redacting, just condensing.
>
> "Professional surveying" means
>
> the practice of land, boundary, or property surveying or other similar professional practices. The term includes:(B)vii)..acquiring survey data.
"to the extent those acts [acquiring survey data] are performed in connection with acts described by this subdivision," [i.e. the practice of land, boundary, or property surveying.]
Kent
You redacted "other similar professional practices". Oh I forgot, that was my final answer. Maybe you're saying that determining elevations is not a similar professional practice to land, boundary and property surveying? OK, I can see your point there, I guess. I would always prefer to agree with you than disagree but what is the big deal about determining elevations being considered surveying by state statute? If a licensee screws up an elevation certificate by incorrectly determining an elevation, shouldn't they be subject to discipline?
Kent
> You redacted "other similar professional practices".
Well, if you can think of any professional practices similar to land, boundary, or property surveying, please mention them. I can't think of any.
> Maybe you're saying that determining elevations is not a similar professional practice to land, boundary and property surveying?
Actually, there are situations that the statute appears to contemplate in which land boundaries are fixed by elevations. For example, in Central Texas there are various lakes where the operating authority took different estates in the land beneath the lake, including fee simple title, under a description that was fixed by an elevation.
In that context, the measurement of elevations is professional surveying, whereas in the context of an elevation certificate it is not.
Kent
I know you're my cousin and everything but it is just a really foreign concept to me as a CA surveyor that establishing and certifying to the federal government and insurance companies the elevations of property and buildings is not professional land surveying. What is it then? If it's not surveying, it must be something else.
Kent
> what is the big deal about determining elevations being considered surveying by state statute? If a licensee screws up an elevation certificate by incorrectly determining an elevation, shouldn't they be subject to discipline?
To answer your question, no. We live in a society of laws. One central tenet is that laws mean what they say, not what some small-time crook who happens to occupy the Governor's mansion wants them to say for his own political objectives. If you want the determination of elevations to constitute one of the licenses activities that Texas registrants may perform, you need to change the laws. In this case, the small-time crook wants to abolish the licensing board because they won't do as he demands.
Kent
> I know you're my cousin and everything but it is just a really foreign concept to me as a CA surveyor that establishing and certifying to the federal government and insurance companies the elevations of property and buildings is not professional land surveying.
Well, each state has what we call "laws" that specifically set out the scope of what falls within the jurisdiction of the board that issues what we call "licenses" to those individuals who under state law are known as "land surveyors" or some variation thereof. The laws of Texas are, strangely enough, not those of California.