Update: State Licensing Board "Censors" GIS Article

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 (77)
www.thegisforum.com (71)
www.spatialsciences.org.au (32)
www.bloglines.com (27)

Our Points

Wednesday, July 2. 2008

Update: State Licensing Board "Censors" GIS Article

Update 7/2/08: See comment below from PS Editor Tom Gibson for the further details.

---- Original post 6/30/08 -------

Back when I read more print magazines, I always relished the editorials. Wow, I thought, a whole page for the editor to tell you what was on his or her mind. My favorite editorial writers back then where Roopinder Tara at Cadence (who I wrote for at that publication, then worked for at Tenlinks.com) and the then editor of Backpacker, I don't recall his name. Today I still make it a point to read the editorials in print publication in geospatial and related industries.

It's in one of those, Tom Gibson's "editor's desk" (sic) column in Professional Surveyor (July 2008, page 4, not online yet) that I found this statement:

In assembling this issue, we had one company withdraw a feature story because a state licensing board was concerned it depicted GIS practitioners as doing work surveyors should be doing, saying they should be licensed as surveyors to do it.

That prompted a few responses from me:
(1) I wonder how the state licensing board had a chance to read the article.
(2) Does preventing such articles to be published limit instead of encouraging discussion on the matter?
(3) Should Directions Media (and other geopublishers formal and informal) be prepared to deal with this issue? Will we be receiving "take down" notices regarding articles that include descriptions of such work in alleged violation of state laws?

Disclosure: I used to work for the company that publishes Professional Surveyor.

Posted by Adena Schutzberg in Surveying at 13:58 | Comments (7) | Trackbacks (0) |

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

I read the same thing and was disgusted. I suspect you should brace for the “take down” demands also. I am very disappointed in any publication that would preview an article to a government agency and censor the content. Would the boards in 49 other states have disapproved? We will never know. Actions on behalf of some who are pushing the licensure of GIS under surveying are very disturbing. Seems Prof. Surv. is being pushed around by a vocal few. As in A. Butler’s April ’08 article, “You might think that all I need to do to settle the matter is to call the regulatory agency…Another state went so far as to notify other states not to answer my letter.”

Most surveyors I know are great people and quite necessary in our society. There does seem to be a small vocal group who are operating with the fear/intimidation model of a self-determined closed society. Ask VERY specific questions of your state boards when the topic comes up. Questions specific to the use of GIS in the local engineering firms. You will, more than likely, find that they do not have the answers.

The issue of GIS licensure under surveying will continue to drain professional effort in the pursuit of a moot point. The technology is already in the hands of guru geeks (not even geographers/GIS professionals) and citizens (Where 2.0 for example). Lets exploit the benefits without throwing up walls!

#1 Bill House on 2008-06-30 09:51 (Reply)

Bill,

Perhaps you know more than I do regarding this matter. You noted: "I am very disappointed in any publication that would preview an article to a government agency and censor the content."

Mr. Gibson didn't explain how this all happened. Are you speaking here from specific knowledge about the publication previewing the article to a government agency? Further, Mr. Gibson didn't say the magazine chose not to publish the article, he said a company "withdrew" it.

My title about censoring referred to the pressure on "the company" that caused it to effectively "self-censor."

I invite Mr. Gibson, if appropriate, to provide further details. I don't think he'll be the last person to deal with this.

#2 Adena Schutzberg (Link) on 2008-06-30 10:23 (Reply)

What part of the public record do Surveyors not get? Does it take a surveyor to read a recorded survey document, no. I would think that this is what professionals do; create for the public good work that they are paid to do for the client/landowner, but when recorded is of use to everyone, including GIS folks.

#3 Jim on 2008-06-30 16:09 (Reply)

I guess I'm the opposite. I never read the editorials. Now I'm sorry I left my print copy of Professional Surveyor at the office. Nevertheless, as a land surveyor I feel compelled to weigh in on this.

A few thoughts:

State Licensing Boards only have authority over those that they license. While a licensing board might be able to pressure licensed surveyors to not participate in the writing of an article (and even that is debatable) they have no authority over publications.

My experience has been that technological advances have tended to render most regulatory efforts of state licensing boards irrelevant. For example; here in Texas, the board recently voted to adopt a rule that it was okay for a surveyor to furnish a legal description in Microsoft Word format. Welcome to the 20th century. Maybe in a couple of years the board will decide to allow us to email CAD drawings as well.

Yes, there is a very small group of very vocal surveyors that seek to use the powers government to insure their own incomes. You will find groups like that in any licensed profession, lawyers being the worst. Ignore them. There are plenty of surveyors that are quite comfortable moving between the dual disciplines of GIS and Land Surveying.

The number of surveyors involved in GIS is growing everyday. It is rare to meet a young surveyor that isn't trained and competent in both GIS and surveying. Older surveyors are catching on as well. The state surveyor's society held a weekend of seminars back in February. One of the most popular sessions was using GIS in your surveying business.

#4 Roger Hart (Link) on 2008-06-30 21:12 (Reply)

Our July issue focused on surveying for GIS, and in my editorial, I espoused how the survey and GIS communities are harmonizing and surveyors are seeing opportunities in GIS but that there still remained legal licensing issues to resolve. To point this out, I stated that an author withdrew a feature story from the issue because a state licensing board expressed concern to him that it depicted GIS practitioners as doing surveying work and should be licensed to do it.

To set the record straight, we had no part in getting that story reviewed by a licensing board or pulling it from the July issue. In this instance, we worked through a company in the industry who assisted us in soliciting the story, but we never received this story. For the record, we would not ourselves ask a government agency to review an article to gain their approval, as we strive for fair and balanced journalism.

While we take no sides in the discussion about the licensure of surveyors and GIS professionals, we are glad to join in the discourse, so both sides can ultimately resolve these issues to everyone’s benefit. Fittingly, the topic will be covered in a panel discussion coming up as part of the Survey Summit at the ESRI User Conference in San Diego in early August.

Tom Gibson, PE
Editor
Professional Surveyor Magazine

#5 Tom Gibson (Link) on 2008-07-02 12:58 (Reply)

Having not seen the article, it's difficult to comment on its content. However, that said, states' Land Surveying Practice Acts define what constitutes surveying, and what activities can only be performed by licensed land surveyors. It's not up to Boards of Registration - their role is to interpret the law. And if activity is ongoing by unlicensed individuals which they determine to constitute unlicensed practice, they do indeed typically have legal authority to pursue sanctions against unlicensed practitioners.

Typically, cadastral work, identifying property boundaries based on interpretation of evidence, jurisdictional boundaries and things of that nature fall under the purview of land surveying. Beyond that, other activities may or may not considered land surveying - it varies by state.

Speaking as a surveyor, the area that concerns me the most is tax mapping offices, which have on occasion overstepped their bounds, making or participating in determinations based on property boundary (such as zoning issues), preparing descriptions, and other activities, based on GIS data and/or photointerpolation of fencelines and other sorts of activities.

#6 Dave Smith (Link) on 2008-07-03 10:48 (Reply)

Roger, just as a point of correction - Licensing boards are typically empowered by state law - state laws, which govern the people in that state. As such, licensing boards typically have purview over not just licensed individuals, but also unlicensed activity in their jurisdiction.

In this case, however, it looks like the author and/or folks he was working with reached out to the licensing board for vetting and review of the article prior to publication, and may have received some concern back from the board and made their own decision to withdraw.

#7 Dave Smith (Link) on 2008-07-03 11:31 (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