Someone Has Taken the Idea Of Survey Accurate Graphically Enhanced System (SAGES) and Is making it Happen

WARNING - Below the author does not consider a very well written article and may have inaccuracies or errors in it and is just considered a draft and quick notepad outpouring of ideas that may have absolutely no value to you. On the other hand, it may be of great value to some surveyors or those wanting to know more about reality and experiences of other surveyors.

I have been promoting the SAGES since 1990 and have written a lot of articles regarding it and how I thought Google Earth would the the key to making it happen. It looks like the people at http://www.metzgerwillard.us/plss/plss.html with tools to do the things we all can use to do more than just use Google Earth for find and plan our survey related boundary or mapping projects.

With my 45 years of thinking related to land surveying, I do not think that we will ever have a system that surveyors will and can easily provide and obtain the information that our local county clerks might be able to supply until the money is set aside to scan and update the maps for survey accuracy needed for the Google Earth System. Little less that will satisfy the strict and, in many cases unfeasible standards set by those who really do not understand the real world of land surveying on the ground including the economic practicalities. However, a system is developing that will help us all better access a way to build that SAGES that I dreamed about back in 1990 with the idea of the Surveyor's Coop.

I recommend that you read the information below between the lines for the sited link I have given you below and play with the plug-in and open up the plss.kml in Google Earth to familiarize yourself with the wonderful tools the people at www.metzgerwillard.us have created for your mapping use and pleasure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
PLSS in Google Earth (PLSGE)

This page briefly describes a free application that runs in Google Earth version 5.0 or later. Please install Google Earth, download PLSGE, and return to this page to learn more. Complete documentation is provided by the PLSGE white paper. See also Earth Survey Plugin.
The principal component of PLSGE is a Google Earth implementation of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) GeoCommunicator map service. It retrieves multiresolution images of the BLM Public Land Survey System (PLSS). Protracted townships west of the antimeridian are provided by the Alaska Spatial Data Management System (SDMS).

Position the area of interest (AOI) in the viewer.
Check the radio button beside the Townships, Meridians, or Special Surveys network link.
On subsequent uses, reposition the AOI and ensure that the network link is checked and selected. When Refresh Mode is Automatic, the overlay is refreshed two seconds after camera movement stops. When Refresh Mode is Manual, choose Refresh from the Edit menu, or right-click and select Refresh in the context menu.

see http://www.metzgerwillard.us/plss/images/plss.jpg or just got to their webpage to read the rest.....at http://www.metzgerwillard.us/plss/plss.html .......

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

There are towns out toward the west of where I live, like Mannford, Oklahoma in Creek County and Pawnee County that have land boundary problems that I have asked Oklahoma Society of Land Surveyors to explain and know one can offer any explanations or help. They just tell you to "walk away" from problems.

There is Cleveland, Oklahoma on out to the Northwest of Mannford that also has the influence of Lake Keystone, the Arkansas River and the Cimmaron River. Those areas can provide the city surveyor with the challenge of primitive, unresolved, and unexplored boundaries. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)Lake Shore Boundary records are helpful but you will find many "unresolved" boundary conflicts where the developers back in 1965 more or less created their Subdivisions around Keystone Lake that did not have the funds that the US Government had to do the section work to match up. So you will find many overlaps and gaps because the US Government did not take the time to resolve a conflict caused by a Subdivision that has already been pinned and lots sold and houses built overlooking the lake.

I have seen some cases where lake boundary land owners have had to "buy" land from the US Government through the USACE real estate division because they unknowingly had built over it even before the lake boundary was established or found and related to the subdivision boundary filed (maybe) at the county clerk's office. Go to the county and see if the USACE filed their boundary surveys (not much cooperation or communication between those two government entities.

I have nothing else to say now - out of juice - getting late and tired....... bye for now. OOOOPPPPPSSSS forgot to mention Osage County - now there is a good place to visit for an example of modern technology in county land records for Oklahoma, LOL.

It is just my opinion and experiences to date, which may not be worth much but I am not at all for it being a requirement. In my opinion now, there are too many requirements and there are many that are out of control and unreasonable. I still feel that a surveyor's most important task is to report his findings, expert opinions, observations, and evidence and let the judge decide on what can be used for the final decision if there is a dispute.

If a person gets State Plane Coordinates on a point using a Continuous Operating Reference Station (CORS), then the coordinates that if provides to adjust the position of the point would be important to show to imply the basis of the coordinates.

I hope that the coordinates obtained, say from that ProMark3 static using the program to insert the CORS correction, would be fine. The survey reports that the programs put out might be a good thing to use to find out the results of the post processing.

To somehow report on the precision reported from the program might be the most helpful way to "qualify" the precision rather than "require" it. If someone reports that as a witness, then that sounds great to me.

Most of us want to know the basis of data and knowledge of who, what, and when provides it so that they can either upgrade it or depend on the precision to carry on from it with a local tie to use for the local project.

Since you are considered an expert, then you might suggest a way to to interpret the reported precision outputs of the equipment you work with there at Ashtech. Most of us do not want to be overwhelmed by technical data that we really do not understand. We just what to know what to expect or depend on for use to help our clients.

Sort of like blood or urine tests, we need to know the range of values that are considered acceptable for certain conditions without a lot of BS and in simple to understand terminology. Value ranges will let us know if the data is within a dependable or acceptable accuracy.

Most of us dirt surveyors have built our trust in equipment performance by comparing the results of new technology equipment with older, proven technology equipment. Occasionally we find out later that there are some not so obvious conditions that are less detectable that affect the results of our measurements with Survey quality GPS equipment. As equipment improves, some of the pitfalls are avoided by having quality feedback built into the equipment hardware and software to keep us informed of the precision or accuracy results, hopefully.

Replies

Gary Breisch October 30, 2011 at 8:16pm

It is just my opinion and experiences to date, which may not be worth much but I am not at all for it being a requirement. In my opinion now, there are too many requirements and there are many that are out of control and unreasonable. I still feel that a surveyor's most important task is to report his findings, expert opinions, observations, and evidence and let the judge decide on what can be used for the final decision if there is a dispute.

If a person gets State Plane Coordinates on a point using a Continuous Operating Reference Station (CORS), then the coordinates that if provides to adjust the position of the point would be important to show to imply the basis of the coordinates.

I hope that the coordinates obtained, say from that ProMark3 static using the program to insert the CORS correction, would be fine. The survey reports that the programs put out might be a good thing to use to find out the results of the post processing.

To somehow report on the precision reported from the program might be the most helpful way to "qualify" the precision rather than "require" it. If someone reports that as a witness, then that sounds great to me.

Most of us want to know the basis of data and knowledge of who, what, and when provides it so that they can either upgrade it or depend on the precision to carry on from it with a local tie to use for the local project.

Since you are considered an expert, then you might suggest a way to to interpret the reported precision outputs of the equipment you work with there at Ashtech. Most of us do not want to be overwhelmed by technical data that we really do not understand. We just what to know what to expect or depend on for use to help our clients.

Sort of like blood or urine tests, we need to know the range of values that are considered acceptable for certain conditions without a lot of BS and in simple to understand terminology. Value ranges will let us know if the data is within a dependable or acceptable accuracy.

Most of us dirt surveyors have built our trust in equipment performance by comparing the results of new technology equipment with older, proven technology equipment. Occasionally we find out later that there are some not so obvious conditions that are less detectable that affect the results of our measurements with Survey quality GPS equipment. As equipment improves, some of the pitfalls are avoided by having quality feedback built into the equipment hardware and software to keep us informed of the precision or accuracy results, hopefully.
[email protected] October 30, 2011 at 5:03pm

Somebody told me that the Oklahoma Society of Land Surveyors is being asked to promote a requirement for accurate GPS coordinates for every certified corner record that will be filed following the date when such a regulation is adopted. This seems to fall right in line with the SAGES concept that you have promoted. Is the idea of precise coordinates on every certified corner record something that you would support. How accurately located would you require it to be if you had the choice to make?

This reply was deleted.

Land Surveyors Co-op of the World

Replies