Surveying, Mapping and GIS

A great picture, posted by Mike Berry to the rpls.com message board...

To follow on to my previous post, "Epic Battles: GIS versus Land Surveying?" I have compiled this list of Land Surveying Practice Acts. These are state laws, which govern the practice of land surveying within each jurisdiction, and which define what each jurisdiction views as work to be performed by licensed land surveyors.

• Alabama


• Alaska


• Arizona


• Arkansas


• California


• Colorado


• Connecticut


• Delaware


• Florida


• Georgia


• Hawaii


• Idaho


• Illinois


• Indiana


• Iowa


• Kansas


• Kentucky


• Louisiana


• Maine


• Maryland


• Massachusetts


• Michigan


• Minnesota


• Mississippi


• Missouri


• Montana


• Nebraska


• Nevada


• New Hampshire


• New Jersey


• New Mexico


• New York


• North Carolina


• North Dakota


• Ohio


• Oklahoma


• Oregon


• Pennsylvania


• Rhode Island


• South Carolina


• South Dakota


• Tennessee


• Texas


• Utah


• Vermont


• Virginia


• Washington


• West Virginia


• Wisconsin


• Wyoming

Discussion revolving around a planned, but retracted article on GIS for Professional Surveyor Magazine has led to a lot of interesting discussion, but to me generally reveals a continuing underlying tension and misperceptions between the GIS and Surveying communities.

Adena Schutzberg / All Points Bulletin: Update: State Licensing Board "Censors" GIS Article
James Fee / Spatially Adjusted: "GIS Practitioners as Doing Work Surveyors Should Be Doing"

While these articles post updates and amendments, based on comments by Tom Gibson, Professional Surveyor's editor, which clarifies that the author decided to retract his article, the underlying question of GIS versus surveying and legal jurisdictions still remains.

Some of the comments are telling - with perceptions and suggestions that State Licensing Boards are somehow cracking down in draconian fashion, demanding censorship and attacking GIS practitioners. Tied into this, we had the MAPPS lawsuit (another issue which I believe will resurface at some point), overlap of surveying with photogrammetry, and other issues. Meanwhile, in the surveying community, we still hear "GIS = Get It Surveyed".

I have my own, perhaps unique perspectives and insights, being a GIS practitioner since the late 1980s, as well as a licensed Land Surveyor, and finally, also serving as chair to a State Licensing Board.

Note: Having said this, please note that my comments to follow are my own personal views, and are not to be taken as official statements or in any way representative of our State Licensing Board's views.

For most GIS practitioners, they readily defer to surveyors' knowledge and domain expertise on cadastral issues - matters of how property boundaries are properly dealt with, and so on - and similarly, most surveyors know their limitations when it comes to GIS. However, there still seems to be occasions which give rise to confusion and misperception.

One basic thing that we all need to come into reckoning with is that Surveying and GIS overlap, but that neither is wholly contained within the other, and that each has areas which may additionally be mutually exclusive from the other. Another part of this Venn diagram equation is Photogrammetry - another topic, which has come up often. I have best seen it illustrated as such:


One area of contention is that some states' Practice Acts are very broad in their definition of what constitutes land surveying - e.g. "measurement and determination of any feature on the earth's surface" - which might not be appropriate for the strictest of interpretations. Many everyday GIS efforts could constitute surveying practice under this definition - but is it appropriate?

If one considers typical State laws pertaining to licensure and practice of land surveying, one will see that the primary objective is in protecting the public, it has little to do with protecting the surveying profession.

So what is falls within the purview of licensing boards, and what falls within the definition of land surveying, toward preventing harm? That may vary somewhat from state to state.

But how might the public be harmed by GIS data, as opposed to proper land surveys? Here are some generalized versions of recent tales I've heard:

• A county tax mapping office, where a GIS practitioner "helps" a realtor friend in a bind by preparing a property description based on lot lines in the GIS. Where did those lot lines come from? Combination of digitized paper maps, lines rubbersheeted to apparent fencelines on orthophotos, and so on. The harm? This description brings with it apparent legal connotation, as a representation of lines of ownership. The buyer may be getting a misrepresentation of what the lot's actual extent and location is.


• A municipality orders a homeowner to demolish and remove a brand new addition, based on their perception that it is in violation of setback lines - based on the GIS.

These things can be only be remedied through a proper survey. One definite question that should be asked, is whether litigation or legal action might ever be a possibility. If it's anything relating to or impacting property ownership and use, such as property boundaries, rights-of-way, easements, or things of that nature, one would definitely want reliable, accurate survey data that can hold up in a court of law. Most county GIS systems will not pass this test.

Perhaps there a jurisdictional issue at stake, such as wetlands delineation (where US EPA, Army Corps of Engineers, State Environmental Protection Agencies or others may or may not have jurisdiction, based on whether or not the land in question is a wetlands or not). Given an instance where a wetland may have been filled, drained, or otherwise encroached upon, and where the original physical evidence of plants, hydric soils, and wetlands flags may no longer exist, a surveyor's location of and ties to the wetland biologists' flags is far more likely to hold up to scrutiny, be accurately retraceable in the field, and be defensible in court than GIS data from recreational-grade GPS receivers or other approaches that are occasionally seen in use.

Or a toxic waste spill - whether it impacted adjoining properties or not - and so on. The same circumstance may come into play with other jurisdictional issues, such as taxation and municipal jurisdiction, and other areas.

Is it a specific legal requirement that these types of data be collected by surveyors in these cases? To turn that question around, in these cases it's instead a matter of basic good practice and adequate protection from dispute and liability as to how the locational data is captured.

Not every GIS practitioner has to deal with these things - but some do very much need to be cognizant of it. And certainly GIS practitioners do need to be aware of state Land Surveying Practice Acts in any regard. Ambiguities will not be resolved overnight - certainly questions of "what DOES that cadastral GIS system really represent" will continue to come up again and again. And certainly many stewards of cadastral GIS are aware of this, and put as many protections in place as they are able to - such as disclaimers and metadata, but for most citizens and casual users of the data, the phrase "consult the metadata" will only lead to glazed eyes. And while GIS systems are fully able to accomodate survey-grade data, and while some nations have made great strides toward a coordinated cadastre, here in the United States, the approach has been far more piecemeal, with varying degrees of robustness in how cadastral data can be improved. I have suggested record-level metadata for parcel data and similar approaches to allow refinement, where good, vetted, survey-grade locational data can be utilized and held toward iterative acquisition of a uniformly high-quality database. The locational accuracy of each parcel and subdivision can then be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, database linkages to plats and other survey data can be put in place.

Certainly not easy questions to answer overnight - but also hopefully I can share more insight and reality than perceptions that "Surveyors are trying to take over GIS".

Update: To follow up, I've put together and posted a "Compendium of State Land Surveying Practice Acts" with links to a number of jurisdictions' laws relating to the practice of land surveying.

As I posted previously, Alabama House Bill 333 strives to allow unlicensed individuals to perform surveying in rural areas - however, quite often it's rural areas which have significant cadastral disputes, problems with records and field evidence, and so on - which all the more require professional expertise and judgement from a knowledgeable land surveyor.

To provide some additional background, the Press-Register in Alabama provides a few details on the dispute - evidently an unlicensed, retired individual with a background as a Process Engineer was seeking to offer surveying services, and was reprimanded by the Alabama licensure board. Claims have been raised that it's "impossible to get licensed" and "impossible to pay a reasonable amount" to have a surveyor retrace the boundary or help resolve disputes.

These are countered by this analysis by Greg Spies, in the following points sent out to ASPLS:

House Bill 333

1. This bill is a slap in the face of everyone who is licensed or in the process of obtaining their license;

2. Evidently this bill was introduced for the sole benefit of an individual who is not a member of the surveying profession in Alabama; this individual, a retired engineer, allegedly, has been reported to the BOL for surveying without a license;

3. HB 333 is a retaliatory bill and places the interests of one individual (who allegedly has been surveying without a license) over the interests of every surveyor in Alabama who followed the legal procedure as defined by the Code of Alabama (1975, as amended) when they obtained their license;

4. HB 333 will set the practice of surveying back 100 years or more; it eliminates professionalism in surveying;

5. HB 333 was drafted without any input or notice from the surveying profession;

6. No licensed surveyor in the State of Alabama supports this bill.

7. The concept of a less educated, less experienced person being allowed to "survey" as a "rural surveyor" is ludicrous, to wit:

a.) rural areas in Alabama comprise approximately 90% of the geographical area of the state;

b.) 90% + of our major interstate and state highways traverse rural areas;

c.) rural areas are mostly more difficult to survey than urbanized areas in that there are fewer recent recorded subdivisions in near vicinity;

d.) surveyors are required to retrace older township plats generated during the U.S. Public Land Survey- these plats are 150 - 200 years old; the physical evidence generated during the original surveys is either lost, obliterated or difficult to find (i.e., the monuments set the bearing trees called for, etc.);

e.) prior surveys (c. 1850-1950) in rural areas were generally poorly done by so-called "rural surveyors" (e.g., non-professional surveyors, engineers, land owners, farmers, etc.) who had little if no experience and education in the art & science of surveying which has caused innumerable problems that must be dealt with by the surveyor of today;

f.) if "rural surveyors" as defined by HB 333 are allowed to practice in Alabama an increase in boundary disputes and subsequent litigation will occur; most boundary disputes and litigation occurring today is because of under-educated and under-experienced "surveyors" having determined the location of a boundary by using poor methods and extremely poor professional judgment and protocol;

g.) Elevation certificates and land title surveys require a knowledgeable and experienced professional surveyor to gather the requisite data for FEMA and the Land Title professionals; These specialized types of surveys require a surveyor to be able to accurately determine difference in elevation relative to a particular datum and require a surveyor who is trained to evaluate the record evidence as it affects a property he is surveying; the "rural surveyor" would not have the skill, experience or knowledge to accomplish these complex types of surveys;

Some have said that it takes too long to find a surveyor in certain parts of Alabama; This is true and the profession needs to address this issue and provide assistance to those counties that have no resident licensed surveyors; We should identify these areas in the vicinity of our practice and periodically offer our services in those areas;

Some have said that the cost of surveying a cotton field or a pasture is too great compared to the value of the land;

It makes absolutely no sense, however, to lower the standards of the profession of surveying for the sake of expediency and expense. Surveyors generally are some of the lowest paid professionals who work within the State.

The surveying profession has steadily sought to raise the bar of the profession over the past 80 years; the legislature passed a bill that was signed into law by the governor in 1996 that requires a four year surveying degree and an additional four years of experience under a licensed surveyor for an individual to apply to take the test to obtain his license; This method of obtaining a license to survey in Alabama supercedes an apprenticeship method that required 8 years of experience under a licensed surveyor to take the test; the window to obtain a license by the former method closed Dec. 31st, 2007.

Interestingly HB 333 was filed just a few weeks after this window closed.

What we need is a bill to strengthen the penalties for someone who surveys without a license. We do not need this "dumb down bill" that would gut the existing laws on the books related to surveying;

Tell your legislators to stop HB 333 from seeing the light of day; this bill needs to be seen for what it is- a veiled attempt to assist a constituent who has broken the law.

Looks like the discussions that started last year between Topcon and Sokkia have led to Topcon acquiring 94% of Sokkia's outstanding stock - 32 million shares, for $194 million.

It will be interesting to see what this does moving forward, along with prior relationships on the GPS front between Sokkia and Novatel, which was purchased by Leica since.

Topcon's press release: http://www.topconpositioning.com/news-events/single/item/topcon-sokkia-combine-to-create-worlds-leading-survey-instruments-supplier/

The Alabama Legislature currently has a bill pending, HB 333, sponsored by Rep. Keahey, which essentially waters down Alabama's regulation for the practice of land surveying - an excerpt of the proposed bill is presented below:

Section 2. (a) The practice of rural land surveyor is limited to rural areas and municipalities with a population of less than 5,000.
(b) To qualify as a rural land surveyor one must meet one of the following requirements:
(1) Graduation from a four-year curriculum in civil engineering or forestry and successfully passing a written examination approved by the board relating to the laws, procedures, and practices of land surveying in Alabama.
(2) Graduation from an approved technical curriculum related to surveying or forestry; two years of supervised surveying experience; and successfully passing a written examination approved by the board relating to the laws, procedures, and practices of land surveying in Alabama.
(3) Eight or more years of field experience in land surveying and letters of recommendation from at least three individuals that will attest to satisfactory surveying work during these years.

Option 3 above bypasses the examination, it allows anyone to recommend the applicant, and thereby bypasses vetting of applicants. The traditional approach pursued, implemented and recommended by NCEES and most State Registration Boards has been to strive for a stable foundation which is not based on any single yardstick, but instead a combination of education, experience and examinations. Further, the case here in Pennsylvania has been to ensure that the applicant has some minimum amount of experience with boundary surveys, has been exposed to both field and office practices, and that experience gained has been progressive, and under the oversight of a licensed professional.

The full bill text is available here: AL HB333

This bill is inconsistent with all prior efforts toward regulation of the surveying profession in Alabama, is inconsistent with NCEES recommendations and their Model Law, and otherwise ill-advised in many ways.

Alabama residents are strongly urged to consider contacting their representatives and recommending opposition to this bill - call (334)242-7600 and ask to be put in touch with your representative.

Poetic Verse on Surveying and Geodesy...

Survey the Whole, nor seek slight faults to find,
When Nature moves, and Rapture warms the Mind.
SCIENCE! thou Daughter of the Skies, 'tis thine
To make Perfection in her Beauties shine;
Thy darkest Clues endear the anxious Mind,
When Study labours thy great Worth to find:
In thy rich Stores our lab'ring Thoughts absorb,
Measure the Earth, and each celestial Orb.
Behold yon Gardens, Trees, and shady Bow'rs,
So often chequer'd with delightful Flow'rs;
Behold yon Buildings, high ascending Spires,
Yon Water, Castle, Mountains, stately Tow'rs,
Yon curing Brook, and cool expanding Shade,
Whose winding Course surrounds the fragrant Mead;
All their Dimensions we with Ease impart,
By GEODASIA, and the Rules of Art.

The maxim in the surveying community of "GIS = Get It Surveyed" is still alive and well, where cadastral GIS is concerned.

Some GIS horror stories du jour:

• Community in New Hampshire that's assigning parcel IDs to gaps and overlaps found in their GIS system


• A county in Oregon that took the above one step further, and actually decided to try and auction off those gap and overlap "parcels" (fortunately the county surveyor stepped in and advised them otherwise)
  
• Central New York state - a county tax department assigned parcel status to a gore area and the county auctioned it off, created many problems.


• A county in Virginia that was fighting to keep their GIS data over that of actual survey data in the case of a discrepancy, strictly because the assessed GIS acreage was more than the actual acreage owned, resulting in more income for the county


• And the most ridiculous of the lot - a county in Texas, that when they couldn't locate the current owner of the parcel, rather than researching it and resolving it, they filled it in with a fictitious name - "Arnold Ziffel".

When it comes to cadastral GIS, I've said it before, and I'll say it again - land surveyors still are and will always continue to be the domain experts when it comes to resolving property line location, relationship to adjoiners and senior ownership, chain of title, relationship to found evidence in the field, and toward discrepancies, gaps and overlaps. Let's also throw understanding of rights-of-way, easements, road dockets, riparian rights, PLSS and the like, and how these likewise affect and impact ownership and taxation.

If you have discrepancies, data gaps, quality issues, other issues, I cannot stress it enough to county tax departments - work with the surveyors. Some counties are very good about this- others are downright frightening if not dangerous.

Javad is also unveiling a number of other offerings, such as 4-receiver cluster units, the "Victor" handheld data collector, software suites, and many other innovations.

Finally back home, after spending a week on the road for a few meetings around the country, including the NCEES Uniform Procedures and Legislative Guidelines committee meeting, to which I was recently appointed, to discuss the 5-year review of the NCEES Model Law and Rules and other associated charges, and a couple of days at the Pennsylvania Surveyors Conference.

Amazingly, during the course of one week, US Airways managed to lose one of my bags not once, but twice, on my way down to Florida and then on the way back. The bag did finally show up, but not after it took me a few trips to the store to restock on a few sundries, and not without finally arriving with a trashed wheel.


At any rate, it was a great trip, but I am happy to be home again.


The PSLS Conference was particularly enjoyable, I got to see a lot of old friends and colleagues from around the state, with a great turnout from our PSLS Pocono Chapter, as well as a few friends from the RPLS.COM message board, a few folks from PAMAGIC, and there were a bunch of great sessions to attend...

The sessions I attended:

• Introduction to FEMA National Flood Insurance, presented by Wendy Lathrop PLS, CFM - this was a great session, giving an overview of the DFIRM flood maps and data, versus Q3, discussion of the zones and base flood elevations and processes for submitting map amendments, for working with instances of fill and development within a flood zone, and other associated issues - will post more on FEMA, "Map Modernization" and the DFIRM process in the very near future, as it raises a huge, longstanding concern of mine regarding DFIRM data. Umm, on second thought, NO, I won't post more on my issues and concerns on DFIRMs and MapMod - at least until AFTER the upcoming RFP response...
  
  

  Surveyors use floodplain maps to identify flood-prone areas of sites and to determine the extent of those hazards. We will look at how first Housing and
  Urban Development (HUD) and later the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) began mapping flood hazard areas, how the process has changed over the years, and the surveyor’s role in updating and correcting those maps. Regulations and use of the appropriate forms provide practical background when serving our clients and protecting ourselves from liability

• Records Research, presented by Lionel "Buck" Alexander PLS & Charles Colony PE PLS - this was a great session on cadastral research and locating legal records from a variety of sources, not just deed books, but registers of wills, orphans' court, road dockets, and many other sources.
  
  

  This workshop will cover how a deed research is started and completed. It will look at indexing systems, reading and interpreting deeds for chain of title, and the use of plats and plans in deed research, wills, estates, and tax sales as related to deed research will be discussed.

• Survey Measurement Analysis, presented by Chuck Ghilani, Ph.D. - this one featured analysis and propagation of error, and adjustment of error via least squares.
  
  

  This workshop will present and demonstrate the basic statistical analysis necessary to perform least squares adjustments. It will describe methods for
  analyzing and adjusting measurements to account for their errors. This workshop seeks to furnish theoretical understanding and demonstrate computer-aided application to common survey types including level networks, horizontal survey measurement networks, and GPS baseline networks.

• Easements and Rights of Way, presented by Gary Kent - this session gave a great overview of some of the legal aspects of easements and rights-of-way, in how easements and rights-of-way can be formed either through written or unwritten means (such as by necessity), along with case law and other great info.
  
  

  This workshop has the overall objective of helping surveyors more fully understand the types, elements and nature of easements, both written and
  unwritten. Specific performance objectives include improving participants'
  knowledge base such that after attending this workshop, they are able to: define what is an easement, outline the various types of easements, explain the difference between appurtenant easements and easements in gross, explain the difference between an easement and a license, identify the ways in which easements can be created and terminated, identify the types of unwritten easements and explain the nature of each type of unwritten easement.

• Dendrology & Forest Ecology, presented by Tim Pierson Ph.D. & Ken Comstock PLS
  This session provided a great overview of forestry - types of trees, mensuration and valuation of trees, forest growth and sustainability and history of Pennsylvania's forests and forest stewardship.
  
  

  Tree identification and understanding of the uses and values of our timber heritage. Also, the study of forest growth and the relationship of trees to our environment, and to our work as surveyors.