Community Forums

Share:

The Next Big Thing  

Page 2 / 4

Alvin Tostick
Posts: 149
Member
(@al)
100+ posts
Joined: 2 years ago

I'll  endorse James Fleming's rebuttal here. Not fully since he wanders of into a polemic but he is quite correct on many of his bullet points.
Technocracy leads to autocratic government. Boundaries are the domain of the SURVEYOR not the geospatialized GISic geomatical agent who longs to be an engineer.
Why should a local boundary survey need to be digitally determined by someone and somewhere in some office of the state capital.
That being said, science and technology offer solutions to problems that can't be ignored. But it is a double edged sword.

Change agent pfft

Reply
FL/GA PLS.
Posts: 3551
Member
(@flga-pls-2-2)
2,500+ posts
Joined: 9 years ago

 @Alvin Tostick

Your vernacular is amazingly similar to a previous poster whom apparently resigned from here.

Reply
Dallas Morlan
Posts: 709
Member
(@dallas-morlan)
500+ posts
Joined: 7 years ago

Made presentations to County Engineers Association of Ohio Conference, Ohio GIS, September 26, 2001 and Professional Land Surveyors of Ohio Annual Conference, February 8, 2002.  These presentations (and the paper "GIS/LIS in Ohio and the NCEES Model Law" submitted) outlined existing Ohio laws that required county tax maps to be created and maintained under the supervision of a licensed Professional Surveyor.  

This did generate some discussion in Ohio and a recognition that using GIS as a tax map did not alter the legal requirements.  Some counties ignored the discussions and openly violated the law John Francis ( RETIRED69) and I frequently posted about this both here and on the other board.

Reply
gschrock
Posts: 3119
Member
(@gschrock)
2,500+ posts
Joined: 9 years ago

Where national cadastres work, and work well, the countries are much smaller, and legacy land records systems were less disparate and diverse to start with.  An idea worth exploring of course, but the main sticking point I could see is that local control is an integral part of the existing fabric, is a point of pride, and highly defended. Retro-fitting the country, a state. or even some counties would be fraught with impracticality and intense opposition. Not to say that lessons learned and specific elements from successful cadastres could not improve on the existing - that may be the most substantive and realistic expectation for examining cadastres.

In trying to herd multiple entities and systems together remember the adage:

"A convoy only goes as fast as the slowest ship"

Reply
thebionicman
Posts: 3043
Member
(@thebionicman)
2,500+ posts
Joined: 6 years ago

If we were establishing a new cadastre independent of common law and prior to settlement this would work. As has been said, a few hundred years of title and occupation would have to be ignored to make it happen. The Profession of Surveying, the powers of Courts and existing real property rights would be replaced by a 'system' having its own imperfections. Over time a serires of manuals and a body of case law would develop to overcome and adapt as these imperfections became apparent.

Maybe we could call this a Public Land Survey System...

Reply
Page 2 / 4