This post, unlike the others in this series, is not about a lab.
Instead, it focuses on a Parcel Mapping forum the occurred at UWEC on Tuesday
March 15, 2016. Attending this forum was an opportunity for students to rub
shoulders with people in the PLSS parcel mapping and land records industry. I
arrived at this session as it was moving into its second half at ~12:45pm,
meaning that I was able to listen to four people presenting on their work and
even participate in a breakout session where groups attempted to solve complex
issues relating to the field.
Jason Poser of Buffalo
County, Wisconsin gave the first presentation I attended. As with many of the
presentations I attended during this forum, his was ripe with jargon,
explanations of how the advance of technology has drastically changed, and how
land records are kept and how surveys are conducted. An example of how the
advance of technology has changed and streamlined land records was that in
Buffalo County there was as much data digitized in 2015 and early in 2016 as
was digitized in from 2006 to 2014. This was due to a shift from using Autocad
to ESRI’s parcel fabric. Poser describes this as being functionally better,
more accurate, and easier to change parcels. He also said that it was quite
convenient to use historical data to see changes made to parcels in the past.
Two other presentations
were much akin the first. Brett Budrow of St. Croix County and Dan Pleoger of
Sawyer County spoke briefly on how GIS has been implemented within their
districts. Budrow even included a little history as to how parcel mapping was
originally done with ink and mylar before Autocad or the use of designated GIS
software products.
The presentation by Mark
Netterlund of Barron County was by far my favorite and most informative. As
someone who has not worked with parcel mapping as a career, I appreciated
Netterslund’s avoidance of jargon and interjection of advice that can be useful
for all different career types. He spoke about how the turnover rate for the surveyors
in the county was low, which allowed a community-like atmosphere to develop. He
also mentioned how important it is to create relationships with other
departments as favors are often exchanged. Finally, he suggested to just talk
with people and let them know what it is that you are up to, often times they
will be quite interested and willing to help with the job.
The final part of the
forum was where the people present formed breakout groups. As this forum was
designed for PLSS and county surveyor people, I was able to observe (but not
contribute to) one of these breakout groups. I wasn’t prepared to contribute
much as much of the material went right over my head, even having spent a few
hours doing simple parcel mapping in a GIS class.
During this breakout
session, the idea of group polarity kept coming to mind. This is where the
ideas of likeminded individuals are amplified when they are put in a group
setting. The main ideas that I got from a good majority of people was how they
needed more funding to complete what surveying and mapping projects they want
to. Despite this, there were few who see the value in educating the people who
write their checks the reason why they would like the money. One cannot blame
them too much for this, as interpersonal communication has typically been a
shortcoming for those in this type of discipline.
As a whole, I would have
to comment that this was a fairly exclusive, yet indecisive group; with
exceptions of course. They seemed to be bonded via the knowledge of common
industry jargon and similar work tasks. Despite this they were usually unable
to agree on ways to solve a problem as everyone who had a solution seemed to
believe that their solution was best and did not wish to entertain other’s
ideas. Yet from this mass of ideas, I was able to pick up some sound advice
about ways to work with others instead of against them.
No comments:
Post a Comment