There has been a lot of back and forth about revising the minimum standards. There has been a great deal of effort made to revise the ABSMS by a group of surveyors from all over the state. Their efforts are to be applauded. The current standards leave much to be desired and were an attempt to fix a problem they weren't equipped to fix.
I have begun to think that maybe minimum standards for our practice is the wrong approach. Maybe we should think about a "Manual of Surveying Instructions for the Private Land within the State of Arizona". Much like the template of the BLM Manual. I envision it to be structured like this:
Chapter 1 - Authorities
State Board of Technical Registration Rules and Statutes
Chapter 2 - County Subdivisions
County Subdivision Statutes
Chapter 3 - City Subdivisions
City Subdivision Statutes
Chapter 4 - Dependent Resurveys & Independent Resurveys
Subdivisions
Public Land Survey System
Tracts, Mineral Claims, Special Surveys
Chapter 5 - Platting
General requirements for platting
County Recorder Requirements
Chapter 6 - Field Notes / Legal Descriptions
General Construction of legal descriptions
Chapter 7 - Easements and Right of Ways
Chapter 8 - Control Surveying
Chapter 9 - Topographic mapping
Chapter 10 - Definitions
Chapter 11 - Index of Case Law.
Wouldn't a manual serve our purpose to educated better than a "minimum standard"?
This a very interesting idea and would better serve the interest of Arizona surveyors, as long as it is a reference manual, and if it is not adopted by the Board as "mandatory requirements". The GIS group could add a chapter on best practices.
ReplyDeleteI think this is Lucas' recommendation. Technical minimum standards don't seem to work well as they are now implemented in most states and as proposed by NSPS. Keep minimum standards "minimal" and work on a "best practices" manual. Great idea.
J.O.
Wow. Not that is nice out of the box thinking. Nice thing about that approach is much of what you listed is already done save for some updates. Ron Platt
ReplyDeleteExcellent idea! When do you plan to start?
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that that would be a very proactive approach to educating people in our profession as opposed to how revising the minimum standards always feels reactive and never seems to be quite enough.
ReplyDelete