GIS and Surveying Working Together

About Directions

Special Announcement

Newsletter Sign Up

Calendar

Syndicate This Blog

RSS 0.91 feed

RSS 1.0 feed

RSS 2.0 feed

Top Referers

myteams.dot.ga.gov (88)
planetgs.com (75)
www.thegisforum.com (72)
www.spatialsciences.org.au (32)
manomano.livejournal.com (28)

Our Points

Wednesday, July 22. 2009

GIS and Surveying Working Together

Just last night I read an editorial that suggested that GIS had stepped into the role that surveyors cover in recent years. "GIS professionals started edging into areas that had previously been relegated to professional surveyors." (POB Editorial, July 2009)

Today I read an opinion piece in the Olympian (Olympia, Washington) about how state officials in cooperation with a private seafood company are using GIS to help determine where surveys of the coastal shelf are needed to determine where state tidelands lie. There have been disputes about growing shellfish in those areas without a permit; that's not allowed.

To prevent future conflict (one company is already involved in a second round of accusations) state Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark has planned an inventory of the tidelands.

Taylor [Shellfish] has agreed to pay for a survey to determine the actual boundaries of the area in question.

"Modern GIS (geographical information system) mapping tools have made this easier, and in cooperation with DNR we’re using them to identify other tidelands areas we farm which may need survey verification," said Bill Taylor.

It’s time to resolve these and other potential disputes.

Under Goldmark’s order to survey all state-owned tidelands, the state agency will compare its own GIS information with that compiled by shellfish companies and state and federal agencies to identify areas in Puget Sound where trespasses are most likely.

Where potential conflicts exist, DNR will then conduct on-the-ground inspection, taking advantage of the extra low tides and long daylight hours of summer. The agency hopes to complete the inventory this summer.

Posted by Adena Schutzberg in Surveying at 06:04 | Comments (12) | Trackbacks (0) |

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

From a legal standpoint, surveys are accurate, while GIS is not. As long as this remains the case, surveyors have nothing to fear from GIS.

#1 Terry (Link) on 2009-07-22 08:51 (Reply)

This is like saying that Shakespeare's Sonnet XVIII is better than the vi text editor.

#1.1 Atanas Entchev (Link) on 2009-07-22 09:21 (Reply)

I think what Terry is saying...walk into a court of law with a surveyors map vs. a map generated through ArcMap by "joe-smo". Which one will the court accept as legally acceptable? The surveyors.

For example, we are digitizing WRP boundarys. If there was a legal dispute. The court would refer back to the surveyors map and notes long before looking at our WRP GIS layer.

#1.1.1 KoS on 2009-07-22 10:06 (Reply)

What I'm saying is that GIS is a tool, and you can pour all kinds of data into it. What matters is who and how generated the data, not what tool you used to make the map. What if the ArcMap-generated map was created using survey data?

#1.1.1.1 Atanas Entchev (Link) on 2009-07-22 12:26 (Reply)

"This is like saying that Shakespeare's Sonnet XVIII is better than the vi text editor."

Actually, what you're saying is snarky and nonsensical. If you really think you have a point to make, you might try making it without the (failed) attempts at humor.

And to answer your one meaningful question: "What if the ArcMap-generated map was created using survey data?"

If that map was generated by a surveyor, it would be a legally meaningful document. If it was produced by someone who is not a surveyor, it would be a picture. Having access to a surveyor's data doesn't confer any sort of legal power upon a mapmaker, regardless of the software they use or their level of skill in using it.

#1.1.1.1.1 Terry (Link) on 2009-07-22 13:01 (Reply)

Well, frankly, it doesn't matter what you or I think. It's what is legal or legally acceptable.

It's almost impossible to replicate correctly a suveryors map in GIS. When I can see the suvery makers/monuments in aerial imagery. Then maybe. Right now, it's kinda hard seeing 5/8" rebar marker in current imagery.

#1.1.1.1.2 KoS on 2009-07-22 14:18 (Reply)

"From a legal standpoint, surveys are accurate". From a legal standpoint, surveys are accepted. The accuracy is implied by the acceptance, and the license of the surveyor. Whether the survey is actually more or less accurate than the 'GIS' is another issue.

#1.2 Chris_SCE on 2009-07-23 08:27 (Reply)

Finally someone gets it.

#1.2.1 Atanas Entchev (Link) on 2009-07-23 10:54 (Reply)

The point about GIS being a tool is probably the most correct. It matters who is applying the tool. A pencil and a straight edge in the hands of a layman (GIS Folks when it comes to Legal Boundary deliniation) are the same instruments that a Surveyor would use to create a map which would have legal relevance for the boundary. The GIS peson could create a closed polygon with either the pencil or ArcGIS and it would still be a picture with out standing. What I believe is the back story here is that GIS alone, with out the "Responsible Charge" inclusion of a licensed and competent surveyor is to often put forward as meeting the program requirements.

#2 Russ Kauffman, PLS GISP on 2009-07-23 08:33 (Reply)

For many years, CAD products were the only software capable of handling the precision of title surveys...or even three dimensions! [ESRI was a 2D tool until a decade ago]

Years of experience and licensing have created a community of surveyors, most of whom are 'applied mathematicians' vs the 'applied scientists' that make up the GIS community.

The reputation of GIS as being innacurate, unprofessional (in comparison) and loosely managed is, quite frankly, richly deserved.

If it's true that GIS'ers are using and displaying survey-quality data in their systems, it's also true that surveyors are beginning to integrate their products with the GIS workflows.

As to the licensing issue - the GISP is worth far, far less as a defensible legal construct than a PLS accreditation. Community-college night school vs. CalTech masters is an apt comparison.

Of course, there's plenty of shoddy surveyors in this world too...but less than there are well-meaning but ill-informed GIS'ers, I'm afraid.

#3 Archie Belaney on 2009-07-23 09:42 (Reply)

The GISP (I am one) is worth zero as a defensible legal construct, for it is not a license issued by a government, but a certificate. The appropriate analogy (from the planning profession) is AICP (professional certification, a feather in the cap), vs. PP (a professional planner's license issued by the state).

#3.1 Atanas Entchev (Link) on 2009-07-23 11:03 (Reply)

A feather, indeed. The GISP carries as much weight with me when I evaluate capabilities...testing well is not a guarantee of functional competency in the practical world.

But it looks good on you, Atanas. ;^)

#4 Archie Belaney on 2009-07-23 17:44 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Advertisers

Polls

What's your opinion of the quality of Google's "new" U.S. dataset?

	November '09
Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
						1
2	3	4	5	6	7	8
9	10	11	12	13	14	15
16	17	18	19	20	21	22
23	24	25	26	27	28	29
30