Accuracy Statements

[CB6753]

The LS Act doesn't require the surveyor to submit a copy of their field notes unless the County Surveyor requests it because there is a discrepancy with another survey. The only way to verify any accuracy statement is by submitting all field notes and adjustment calculations to the CS with the draft maps. Let's not go there.
Waste of time.

[mpallamary]

Brown is the bible.

https://www.amazon.com/Curt-Brown-Chron ... 1452090521

[CBarrett]

I am slightly partial to the surveying book my grandpa co-wrote... but that wouldn't be useful here, it is in my native language.

for novelty value: https://knjiga.hr/prakticna-geodezija-slavko-macarol-1/

[Peter Ehlert]

The LS Act doesn't require the surveyor to submit a copy of their field notes unless the County Surveyor requests it because there is a discrepancy with another survey. The only way to verify any accuracy statement is by submitting all field notes and adjustment calculations to the CS with the draft maps. Let's not go there.
Waste of time.

"Adjustments"... smearing the blunder through the whole project.

BTW the CS is not the authority on accuracy

[CBarrett]

So, I am poking back at this topic...

Pros:
Let's say that surveyors agree about allowing the accuracy statement legislation to move forward, BEACUSE this is likely to open new business opportunities to a chunk of surveyors short term, and possibly many more long term. Let's say it gives us more leverage to capture a segment of underground utility locating business.

Incidental pros: More mid level surveyors being aware of the concept sooner in their careers.

Cons: it has impact in other aspects of surveying (RS's and subdivision mapping - creates more work, adds expense and it does not materially add to the value of work or service - as in, additional obligation without the opportunity to capture additional fees).

Is there a way to find a compromise, to where a measure will give surveyors leverage to capture some of the lost markets, and it does not create burden for other 'branches'?

Seems like we are in need of both - not making things more difficult for ourselves, but at the same time start plugging some of the holes which are siphoning out business opportunities.

We want more surveyors, especially licensees. Great, - that comes with the professional responsibility of preserving and/or recapturing business.

[David Kendall]

Is there a way to find a compromise, to where a measure will give surveyors leverage to capture some of the lost markets, and it does not create burden for other 'branches'?

My suggestion is to limit the scope of the proposed legislation to documents that are coordinate based (typically CSPC) as a place to start

Survey products which demonstrate reliance on found record monuments will not benefit as much from accuracy statements.

The utility companies will not be identifying record monuments on their mapping products. The coordinates floating in space have a great potential for error and blunders. This is where we should focus our efforts.

The impetus to apply this rule to all survey products is destined to fail

[CBarrett]

I'm watching the "Asset Mapping" Geospatial Virtual Event, segment on SUE and professional standard of care, presented by Wes Kaisershot of WGI.

SUE Quality Levels.JPG

[CBarrett]

Webinar registration: https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/registe ... DlRW_RH4Zg

[CBarrett]

Some post webinar thoughts:
Overarching message from this meeting was that there is so much work in underground utility location that labor shortage especially in surveying is holing back the work progress, therefor there are factions looking to deregulate who can attest to the accuracy of the work.

How do we get more people into surveying, A) show them the money, b) make the work little less volatile to recessions, c) make it more attractive to a larger demographic (there is a myriad of surveying tasks that does not require excessive amounts of brawn.

We are still battling the image that in order to be a surveyor one must fit the burly muscle bound archetype, or they won't be able to keep up.)
There is no stereotypical male upper body strength required to run circles around someone intellectually.
Machine control work has taken away the need to be able to sledgehammer 180 hubs per day, 5 days a week into the compacted dirt. Most of this work is not done by a supervising LS anyway. However for many years this was a barrier to entry. Now we are seeing results of some of those attitudes.

[DWoolley]

Some post webinar thoughts:
Overarching message from this meeting was that there is so much work in underground utility location that labor shortage especially in surveying is holing back the work progress, therefor there are factions looking to deregulate who can attest to the accuracy of the work.
...
We are still battling the image that in order to be a surveyor one must fit the burly muscle bound archetype, or they won't be able to keep up.)
...

I attended most of the webinar referenced.

I encourage folks to read this entire thread. This thread was started two years ago this month.

CBarrett, the forum community has spoken and they are not interested in boarding the underground utility and accuracy life raft. Cry no tears for them. It is time to focus on training people in the land surveying adjacent communities - professionals interested in learning how to measure, locate, map etc. - to perform the work. Professional mercy should be granted, professional euthanasia, by efficiently training GISPs, contractors, inspectors, engineers, architects to work around the land surveying community and establishing guardrails. I frame it in my mind as the Old Yeller responsibility.

Land surveying practitioners are aging out of the profession. Phil, earlier in this thread, has rightfully stated we need fresh horses in land surveying. In the two years since this thread was started, and the previous two decades before, the community has deteriorated on most fronts. I believe the day for creating a plan, your vaunted SWOT, has come to pass. The younger licensees that enjoy land surveying should seek shelter in a public agency.

At CalPoly yesterday, speaking to their geospatial students, I offered a career path that will not look like the path that our contemporaries have followed. It was not spun as a romantic tale that made up my career timeline.

Lastly, where do you work in which there are "burly muscle bound archetype"? Weiliczka Salt Mine? A logging camp? I mostly see card carrying AARP types, not archetypes. Such hyperbole in a DEI/ESG world kills conversations - wise people will not touch such nonsense with a ten foot pole. I am not smart enough to swerve around it.

DWoolley

[CBarrett]

Lastly, where do you work in which there are "burly muscle bound archetype"? Weiliczka Salt Mine? A logging camp? I mostly see card carrying AARP types, not archetypes. Such hyperbole in a DEI/ESG world kills conversations - wise people will not touch such nonsense with a ten foot pole. I am not smart enough to swerve around it.

DWoolley

Well, as one example, there is a large company where I worked for 6 years which was actively discouraging me from getting field experience and my LS. Fast forward few years after I left, I learned that they employed some of the party chiefs who were actively objecting to women in surveying. I lived it and I heard it. Some of them are still in business with same mindsets. That's the part I was mentioning by people not fitting archetypes and being held back because of it. I think when you are the part of the archetypal group, you don't notice it, and definitely don't have a full appreciation of the ramifications. I am not very unique in having this experience.
I'm not familiar with What DEI/ESG world is?

Yes, we can't broach those subjects, lest the gatekeepers get stung? I'm not sure where you re going with that.
In the meantime when non archetypal speaker at a CLSA meeting is getting heckled during a presentation, the rest of the colleagues just sit there.
We keep wanting more people in surveying, but at the same time we are rather exclusionary with "but, no, not like that".

Anyhow that's a whole separate thread.

[LS_8750]

In other words, documenting with accuracy the as-built world.
Putting on the 3D scanner goggles and taking a walk around documenting utility locations against other improvements, boundary and easement lines.
It's pretty Buck Rogers to think about.
All legal stuff.
I don't see the death of land surveying.
The younger ones coming up are excited, which is encouraging.

[CBarrett]

Some post webinar thoughts:
Overarching message from this meeting was that there is so much work in underground utility location that labor shortage especially in surveying is holing back the work progress, therefor there are factions looking to deregulate who can attest to the accuracy of the work.
...
We are still battling the image that in order to be a surveyor one must fit the burly muscle bound archetype, or they won't be able to keep up.)
...

I attended most of the webinar referenced.

I encourage folks to read this entire thread. This thread was started two years ago this month.

CBarrett, the forum community has spoken and they are not interested in boarding the underground utility and accuracy life raft. Cry no tears for them. It is time to focus on training people in the land surveying adjacent communities - professionals interested in learning how to measure, locate, map etc. - to perform the work. Professional mercy should be granted, professional euthanasia, by efficiently training GISPs, contractors, inspectors, engineers, architects to work around the land surveying community and establishing guardrails. I frame it in my mind as the Old Yeller responsibility.

Land surveying practitioners are aging out of the profession. Phil, earlier in this thread, has rightfully stated we need fresh horses in land surveying. In the two years since this thread was started, and the previous two decades before, the community has deteriorated on most fronts. I believe the day for creating a plan, your vaunted SWOT, has come to pass. The younger licensees that enjoy land surveying should seek shelter in a public agency.

At CalPoly yesterday, speaking to their geospatial students, I offered a career path that will not look like the path that our contemporaries have followed. It was not spun as a romantic tale that made up my career timeline.

Lastly, where do you work in which there are "burly muscle bound archetype"? Weiliczka Salt Mine? A logging camp? I mostly see card carrying AARP types, not archetypes. Such hyperbole in a DEI/ESG world kills conversations - wise people will not touch such nonsense with a ten foot pole. I am not smart enough to swerve around it.

DWoolley

Business or strategic planning and similar concepts are ongoing efforts, and they changes as current conditions change. Even you are doing it, albeit somewhat subconsciously. It becomes more useful when it is more deliberate and organized. When it is not, it ends up being a knee jerk reaction and a struggle for survival (which is where CLSA is and many surveyors are), when it is more organized it can identify and focus on the efforts which will establish or re-establish industry leadership. Unlike legal battles which are often a fairly static issues which take a long time to challenge, business maneuvering is quite bit more dynamic. Even more so when it comes to technology.

[mpallamary]

https://stacker.com/careers/jobs-might- ... t-50-years


Surveyors and mapping technicians

Although some specialized positions in the field require advanced education, most surveyors can enter this profession with only a high school diploma. That option, however, will likely soon be off the table as robotics and other technological advancements render their skills obsolete.

Measurement is Dead

[DWoolley]

https://stacker.com/careers/jobs-might- ... t-50-years


Surveyors and mapping technicians

Although some specialized positions in the field require advanced education, most surveyors can enter this profession with only a high school diploma. That option, however, will likely soon be off the table as robotics and other technological advancements render their skills obsolete.

Measurement is Dead

Thank you for the article.

The link can be summarized as; of all the careers in the nation, field surveyors and unlicensed technicians makes the top 5 facing certain death. Supposing, best case, there is no intended order to the list, the field surveyor and unlicensed technicians remains on a list of 50 careers to do the black dot fade. This is not news to this forum crowd. I thought she was napping, I went to wake her, and she was cold.

We are sure to see our brethren continuing to whistle past the graveyard.

This month I will begin training the survey adjacent communities at a local community college. Crowd sampling indicates these folks welcome the opportunities to learn new skills. The idea of building a sustainable business model appeals to the people I have spoken with i.e. providing new services to their new clients and more specifically, understanding how to provide and quantify measurements with their services. Currently, some folks are offering the ever mysterious "survey grade" and "1 cm GNSS" measurements based on manufacturer's sales language . Although the land surveyors have expressed little interest in qualifying their measurements, the survey adjacent folks will need to know how to quality control their measurements. Stealing from the Ray Davies album that was aptly named "Give the People What They Want". Side note, I have not listened to this album in 35 years, but put it on after posting here, still good after all this time.

Before asking BPELSG to stop folks from providing coordinates on fixed works - even though land surveyors apparently lack the interest - please ask BPELSG if they make "rules for tools". Spare everyone the faux incredulous theatrics. Frankly, we should discuss going the other way with accuracy statements i.e. why not remove 8726 (n) so folks wanting this information can get it from the survey adjacent communities. Now that I mull it over, yeah, let's unburden the land surveying community. We should dutifully Old Yeller this dog.


DWoolley

[CBarrett]

How is your accuracy statement proposition different from the PRC code accuracy statements required for a product containing coordinates?