Interesting response to a PS Editorial!

daw

Posts: 409
Joined: 06/02/10

Interesting response to a PS Editorial!

Posted by daw on Jul 10, 2011 11:38 am

Response to the Professional Surveyor May 2011 Editor's Desk:

Under Attack? Editorial

http://www.profsurv.com/magazine/article.aspx?i=70969

Original article: http://www.profsurv.com/magazine/article.aspx?i=70930

DA Wahlstrom JD MS FASCE
UH Professor Emeritus

Mike Falk

Posts: 13852
Joined: 06/08/10

Re: Interesting response to a PS Editorial!

Posted by Mike Falk on Jul 10, 2011 5:17 pm

From the original article:

"...Shortly before preparing this column I became aware of a third situation, in Rhode Island. Surveyors there are confronted with House and Senate bills that propose to change the scope of practice for professional engineers. These bills would create a category of “engineering surveys” that engineers would be allowed to perform. While staying clear of boundary surveys, engineers would be lawfully permitted to complete “all surveying and mapping activities required to support the sound conception, planning, design, construction, maintenance, and operation of engineered projects.” I ask you to tell me what that includes? Clearly these activities include a large portion of what is currently regulated as surveying activity under Rhode Island law...."

This seems prudent as the current law states:

Definitions. – As used or within the intent of this chapter:

...(f) "Practice of engineering" means any service or creative work, the adequate performance of which requires engineering education, training, and experience in the application of special knowledge of the mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences to services or creative work such as consultation, investigation, evaluation surveys,planning and design of engineering systems, and the supervision of construction for the purpose of assuring compliance with specifications; and embracing those services or work in connection with any public or private utilities, structures, buildings, machines, equipment, processes, work, or projects in which the public welfare or the safeguarding of life, health, or property is concerned..."

I don't have a problem with legislature more clearly defining their intentions.

The 3 states together are indicative of Land Surveyors not trying to control their own destiny. By not taking proactive leadership positions in GIS, GPS and now Laser Scanning Land Surveyors are leaving a significant portion of their destiny to others. I am guessing that the low rate of college graduates in the profession is a leading reason for a lack of understanding of the importance of defining, and contolling, our collective future.

Mark Mayer

Posts: 3424
Joined: 06/03/10

Re: Interesting response to a PS Editorial!

Posted by Mark Mayer on Jul 14, 2011 12:21 pm

Oregon Law allows Engineers to do just the sort of surveys that your post indicates would be allowed under this proposal. I can assure you that almost no Oregon P.E.s choose to exercise the right.