California Surveyors Forums

Article from most recent POB.

Both principals are mechanical engineers.

No.

Police Departments do the same thing all the time.

As long as they do NOT include ANY references to boundary lines, right-of-way lines or survey monuments, they're just collecting topographic evidence for use in their accident reconstructions and investigations.

If one of them sits in the stand and mentions ANYTHING about the accuracy of their maps or diagrams, then they could be guilty of practicing land surveying without a license. Of course, that might be a way to discredit their topo, if an attorney was to ask specific questions leading them into making accuracy statements. Just sayin'!

Of course, there will be comments relative to the fact that these guys are mechanical engineers rather than civil engineers who have exemption under the PE Act and LS Act.

Could be an interesting discussion. Pass the popcorn, please.

HD scanning is popular with law enforcement agencies. We worked with one crew of officers. Another crew on the same site came from the Coroner's office; I had no idea a coroner would be doing scanning. When we started asking informal lunchtime questions they kind of got a deer in the headlights look. I think the wiz-bang of the 3D model in the courtroom along with the uniform and badge has led to no one really questioning them on pesky little issues like accuracy. I think some day when they get a well financed defendant the defense attorney will be smart enough to obtain a Land Surveyor expert who will have all sorts of fun questions which will cause a repeat of the L.A. crime lab O.J. Simpson debacle.

There is an exception for Law Enforcement agents in the Land Surveyor's Act. I don't feel citing them is a good example how this ISN"T surveying because, in fact, it is. Just like there is an exception for employees of the Federal Government surveying the exteriors of federal lands (Section 8730 (a)) to set monuments, there is an exception for law enforcement performing their duties. It was put in there on purpose, to except them, because they are actually surveying. (Section 8730 (d). If they weren't really surveying, you wouldn't have to have an exception for their actions.

That being said, you'll find that more engineers, oil companies, and attornies are using scanning than surveyors. They've figured out they can get rid of us by having this new and exiting technology.

Here is the law regarding the definition of surveying: Section 8726:
"A person, including any person employed by the state or by a city, county or city and county within the state, practices land surveying within the meaning of this chapter who, either in a public or private capacity, does or offers to do any one or more of the following:

(a) Locates, relocates, establishes, reestablishes, or retraces the alignment of elevation of any of the fixed works embraced within the practice of civil engineering, as described in Section 6731.

(b) Determines the configuration or contour of the earth's surface, or the psition of fixed objects above, on, or below the surace fo the earth by applying the principles of mathmatics or photogrammetry."

That last part sounds like if you're showing mathmatical representation of spacial relationships between a skid mark and a crashed vehicle, you're surveying (ibid- Section 8730(d). If you're a law enforcement officer, you fall under the legal exception, but if you're simply a private consultant, your outside the law as it is defined here unless you're simply "taking a picture" of the crime sceen using laser scanning.

If I was ever in a court situation where the cops had used survey equipt to obtain evidence against me I would really go after their training and knowledge of accuracy and proper survey procedures.

I have wondered about their laser pistols. A ammo pistol has limits of accuracy verses the distance the bullet travels. Now with the approx same length of barrel sights they are lazering a vehicle near 1/4 mile away, GG fwy is one area. Kinda makes you wonder if they are hitting the moving vehicle they are aiming at.

I would say that the work they are doing is surveying, especially since their website lists "Scanning/Survey" under the "Services" tab. My first assumption was that they must have an LS that is an officer in the company that is over-seeing the work being performed. Then when I read the article and their methods.... Now I think it is unlikely there is even an LSIT in the house.

Maybe one of the southern California chapter's PPC should send a friendly letter to them.

6731.1 of the PE Act says that type of surveying goes to the CE. The CE is tested on it as part of licensure. I don't know about mechanical engineers.

If I were to object, I would contest more on the grounds of MEs doing work that falls under the description of engineering surveying (the domain of the CE) than land surveying.

However, those MEs are pretty smart and I don't see why they would need a CE on board to perform that kind of work.