Author Archives: sam.weargis@gmail.com

Results of the NYS GIS/Geospatial Business Survey

Posted on by
Reply

Survey Background

Late last spring eSpatiallyNewYork published an online survey with the intent to collect and establish baseline data on the New York State GIS/Geospatial business community.  At face value one might find this peculiar in that I am a career civil servant but I have increasingly realized over the past several years how important the geospatial business and industry sector will be in providing long term support and sustainability to statewide public GIS programs.  Fortunate as I have been over my career to have been in on the ground floor in the 1980s when government GIS programs began to lay the foundation of the geospatial technology as we know it today, these same tax-payer funded programs and systems have changed profoundly.  While geospatial is embedded – and to the point of almost expected –  in nearly all elements of daily government and managing the public good,  the equivalent funding for expanded government staffing and infrastructure has not been realized.  If anything, capacity has been reduced in context of tax caps, reduction in the government work force, and on some level, the growing belief and understanding among government decision makers that GIS solutions can be accessed and provided outside their organization (i.e., The Cloud, etc.).  And in doing so, eliminating the need to build the infrastructure and capacity with their own resources.  And there is no end in sight.    And it’s my belief, rightfully so.

Having served on the statewide GIS Coordinating Body (now dba the Geospatial Advisory Council [GAC]) for 17 years, I saw many attempts, with little coming to fruition, to bring private sector input into the statewide GIS planning and coordination efforts.   And I suspect that much will be the same with the current GAC alignment as industry representatives ultimately realize there is no real business incentive to participate in such “committees” so closely aligned with government.    And the statewide geospatial business climate has only become gloomier since 2011 when “GIS Services” were removed from the NYS Office of General Services (OGS) contract – making it much more cumbersome and difficult for governments to secure geospatial consultant services.   The good news on the landscape is that there appears to be healthy dose of private sector participation the NYS GIS Association.  A much more logical and independent place for the geospatial business community to promote its services and products to both government and industry.

Which leads to the survey.  Upon developing and finally publishing the survey, I made significant efforts to reach as broad representative sample of the geospatial business community as possible.  This included posts to the New York State and GISMO listservs as well as through geospatial Meetup groups (i.e., GeoNYC).    Contacts were also made to announce the survey through the New York State Society of Professional Engineers, New York Business Council, New York City Technology Council, and the NYS GIS Association.  I also announced the survey to a list of professional contacts I maintain and through my LinkedIn account.  The survey was short (15 total questions) consisting of a combination of multiple choice and fill-in-the-blank questions.  Respondents had the option of leaving their name and contact information – of which 32 of 52 provided.  (While I made the survey accessible via the hyperlink above I am no longer collecting data).

Rather than simply providing direct access to the survey URL in the various posts and outreach efforts, I requested that any business interested in taking the survey contact me directly and I would then provide the URL.  In doing so, I could monitor who was actually filling out the survey and avoid obtaining data from non-qualified respondents.  Not the most scientific approach, but for the most part it worked.  In all, a total of 52 surveys were returned that provided useable data which could be summarized for discussion.

Broad categories which are summarized below are not necessarily unique with individual firms potentially being included in several categories.   This is a long read and certainly does not fit into the traditional “shorter” blog postings, includes a lot of statistics of which I apologize, but I wanted to provide as much detail as possible.  Here you go.

Survey Result Highlights

Quick Facts (All Respondents):

  • Nearly 65% of the respondents have been doing business in the GIS/Geospatial space for more than 10 years
  • Almost half of the survey respondents stated they have a staff of 1-5 people dedicated to GIS/Geospatial work
  • 48% indicated that GIS/Geospatial was the primary focus of their business with another 30% being part of larger engineering/photogrammetric/environmental services company.
  • Only 7% of all respondents indicated they were a Minority Women Enterprise Business (WMBE).
  • Most of the respondents (52%) indicated one-third or less of their GIS/Geospatial business was within New York State.  Just 13% (7 respondents) stated that all of their GIS/Geospatial business was in the Empire State.
  • Among all respondents, state and local government (including nonprofits, schools, and academia) business work is a limited within the State of New York
  • Over half of the respondents indicated they do not do any federal work
  • About one-third of the respondents indicated one-third or more of their work was from business and industry
  • Both the “overall” economy and removal of GIS contract services from the NYS OGS contract were both seen as major factors in negatively impacting business
  • Development of mobile/smartphone technology  and web services are seen as the primary business development space over the next 2-4 years
  • Overwhelmingly, the New York GIS Association is the professional organization respondents are aligned with and participate
  • Surprisingly, only 20% of the respondents communicate business issues/concerns/opinions with NYS elected representatives
  • Good news is nearly 90% of the respondents state their level of business has remained constant or increased in the last five years

Selected Cohort Facts:

New York State GIS/Geospatial Businesses with 10+ Years  Respondent Total = 17

  • Includes  businesses in which GIS/Geospatial is both sole focus or as part of a larger engineering firm
  • Few Minority Women Business Enterprises (MWBE)
  • Half of the respondents (17) stated that about  50% of their business in generated in New York State of which only one-third is from state and local government
  • These “older” GIS firms do minimal work in the federal space
  • Most have had stable staffing over the past five years and feel that the “overall” economy is impacting their company’s GIS business development and growth
  • One of the few cohorts which believe that some of the decline in business is because clients are building more in-house capabilities
  • Most believe the greatest potential growth is in mobile and smartphones markets including social media
  • In context of professional affiliations, a majority of the respondents listed the NYS GIS Association
  • Few firms communicate their business concerns and needs with elected representatives

Comments on “improving the business climate” include:

  1. More information/education about the integration of GIS into business operations and various financial levels that can be utilized (ArcGIS Online, dedicated desktop or server, open source, etc.)
  2. Awareness. I think we need to raise awareness that the geospatial component of what people are doing and need to be done is increasing.
  3. Increased grant funding for Local Governments, not related to shared services
  4. More open data sharing, particularly in NYC and Long Island; more widespread public awareness and usage.
  5. I believe that the GIS business climate is largely subsumed by the IT realm; its growth will primarily be a function of demonstration of value add to business processes.
  6. It would be huge if grant programs were more readily available to help complement our significant R&D investment to continually bring new geo-spatial and mobile technologies to bear for our clients.
  7. Streamlined/improved procurement procedures for State and municipal government entities; this would be achieved primarily through a more efficient NYS OGS contract approval and updating procedure.
  8. Increased Grant Funding for GIS Initiatives. Many municipal governments still see GIS as a ‘nice to have’ and will not see the benefits until they have the opportunity and funding to implement.
  9. OGS contract. Renew SARA Grants
  10. More funding for Municipal GIS related projects
  11. More positive action at the State level. The state has done very little to encourage GIS growth at the local government level. In addition, their cooperative funding for GIS has been deficient.
  12. I think that there is a need to bridge the “flat” GIS in government arena with the surging GIS in business arena. I believe that there are a lot of untapped resources and un-met needs on both sides
  13. The New York State Help Desk is an outstanding help to small organizations and Local Government.
  14. Having worked in other states, I rank NY as one of the better states in terms of geospatial infrastructure and professional communities.
  15. When you try doing work in states outside of New York, you realize how lucky we are to have such helpful GIS people and resources like the NYS GIS Clearinghouse and the various County websites

 Smaller Firms (1-5 dedicated staff) Respondent Total = 12

  •  In general,  GIS/Geospatial is primary focus of business in this cohort
  • Half have been in business only 1-5 years
  • Over half of the respondents indicate that only one-third of their business is in New York State
  • Five of 12 respondents indicate they do no local or state government work
  • Overall, contract work with state and local government (including  nonprofits, schools, and academia) is not currently a major revenue generator
  • Of all the cohorts responding, smaller firms appear to engage in more federal work (albeit this is based only on 12 respondents)
  • Business has grown over the past five years

This group provided some of the most detailed comments and suggestions:

  1.  Increased marketing
  2. General awareness. I think that a lot of clients generally didn’t realize they needed a map right away. Making businesses and government agencies aware of what maps can do would be great.
  3. Better ROI documentation- connecting the cost of geospatial programs to the cost of doing business.
  4. GIS education at executive level. Dedicated funding sources. GIS generally gets “scrap” money.
  5. I think those in the GIS/Geo industry in NYS need to partner with strong programming/IT partners or build these capabilities on their own. There are plenty of clients that have the need for geospatial tools – direct mailing companies, beverage companies, and telecom. At the same time these clients are not interested in large proprietary installations of GIS software. They certainly are not interested in paying high licensing fees. If we could find a way to bring together those in the IT sector with the traditional GIS professionals and let them build partnerships I think GIS people would find themselves in a much better position to compete in this new world of GIS/IT. At a small scale in Buffalo, we present at events like Bar Camp Buffalo, Database Meetups (we talk about PostGIS), and Open Data Meetups. The people attending these events are inherently interested in geospatial technologies and are doing some pretty cool things even though their exposure to geospatial concepts is very superficial. We are starting to build partnerships with these people/firms. The common bond with these people is the ability to develop web applications using non-proprietary programming languages and frameworks. The niche we bring is geospatial.
  6. Additional funding for the NYS Archives Grants. State mandated parcel data structure similar to MassGIS Level III.

Firms with GIS/Geospatial as Primary Focus of Business Respondent Total = 25

  •  In general, business is spread out over all sectors including state and local government, industry and business, and federal work
  • Includes businesses with a wide range of staff sizes
  • Small number of WMBE firms
  • Over half of the 25 respondents in this category indicate only a one-third of their business is generated in New York State of which only one-third is associated with state and local government contracts.  (Said another way 1/3 of 1/3 = state and local government work).  One of the major findings of this survey
  • A majority of this category indicate at least one-third of their business is generated by business and industry
  • Over half indicate their business has grown over the past five years
  • Like other cohorts, this business sector indicates removal of GIS services from state contract has impacted business in a negative way as well as the overall economy
  • In context of professional affiliations, a majority of the respondents listed the NYS GIS Association
  • Few firms communicate their business concerns and needs with elected representatives

Comments from this group included a mixture of comments above as well as these unique statements:

  1. Procurement at any level of government in New York State is incredibly painful. The contracting process is very unfriendly to anyone but particularly to smaller vendors.
  2. It would be great to establish contracting vehicle(s) similar to the OGS vehicle – contracting can be quite challenging at the present time.
  3. NYS is poorly represented in MAPPS, arguably the largest and most influential professional organization representing private sector firms in the geospatial industry. I would be interested in pursuing a stronger relationship between the NYS Geospatial community and MAPPS.
  4. There are no statewide conferences or other forums that “work” for private companies. The NYS Geospatial Summit and NYS GIS Conference are centered on government. Recently private industry has not been able to present and there are limited networking opportunities for private industry. The organizers want private companies to pay significant sponsor fees (our company recently paid $2,000), but won’t let us speak – crazy. We are made to feel like we are the enemy. These constraints were loosened at the recent NYS GIS conference, but it’s still not a fully inclusive environment for private industry. There are similar problems in NYC. The primary technology event every year is the Technology Forum each fall. Private industry can not officially attend unless the company has a booth, which costs at least $10,000. This keeps all the small and medium-sized firms away, but let’s Accenture, IBM and the other “gorillas” participate.
  5. Wonderful, welcoming bunch of GIS professionals in NY (having lived/worked in other states). Majority love what we do, but GIS is not seen as essential. Under appreciated. Possibly our fault as an industry. We need spokespeople.

 Firms with 100% of Business in New York State Respondent Total = 7

  •  Only one recorded that GIS/Geospatial was primary focus of business
  • Business spread out over state and local government and to a lesser extent business and industry
  • None are a MWBE
  • Very noticeable that little comes from federal business contracting
  • Company size has remained level over past five years
  • Professional affiliations were a mixture including NYS Association of Professional Land Surveyors (NYAPLS)
  • Interesting, albeit this is a small cohort, over half of the respondents indicated they communicated business concerns and issues with elected representatives

Comments from this group included a mixture of comments above as well as following unique statements:

  1.  A more knowledgeable public of what GIS is and where it can be applied.
  2. More training for end users in municipal roles
  3. Increased grant funding for Local Governments, not related to shared services
  4. Adoption of GIS delivery of any land/utility/transportation related public information by all local municipalities and state government
  5. The New York State Help Desk is an outstanding help to small organizations and Local Government.
  6. When you try doing work in states outside of New York, you realize how lucky we are to have such helpful GIS people and resources like the NYS GIS Clearinghouse.
  7. ALL counties in the State should be required to provide land parcel level vector files to the public for the cost of reproduction and delivery. The situation in Suffolk County is ridiculous!

 MWBE Firms Respondent Total = 7

  • Five of seven firms indicate GIS/Geospatial was primary focus of business
  • A majority indicate that at least one-third of their annual business is in NYS
  • Five of seven are not involved in any state and local government (including  nonprofits, schools, and academia)
  • Six of seven do not do any federal work
  • Four of seven indicate all work is with business and industry
  • Six of seven have seen their staff increase or significantly increase in the last five years
  • Similar to other cohorts, most state the greatest potential growth is in mobile and smartphones markets including social media
  • There is a mixture of  professional affiliations
  • Not one communicate their business concerns and needs with elected representatives

Summary and Conclusions

The New York State GIS/Geospatial Business Survey is not intended to be an end-all towards assessing and summarizing the geospatial business climate across the Empire State.   Results from a simple 15-question multiple choice/fill-in-the blank survey, completed by 52 statewide respondents, is hardly a mandate or implied to be definitive.  If anything it is meant to start the discussion and look deeper into how business and industry can better serve and support the statewide GIS community.

With that in mind, here is what I believe are ten relevant takeaways from the survey and the basis for further discussion:

  1. Based on data collected as part of this survey, consultant business activity in state and local government (including  nonprofits, schools, and academia) is abysmal.  While business outlook for many of the respondents can be generally considered optimistic, it is definitely is not because of government spending and procurement.  With the anticipated need for more industry and business support in government geospatial programs in the future – state and local government spending should be the opposite of this trend.
  2. Looking for a solution to change and this trend will take time and thoughtful review.  Bringing the GIS/Geospatial business community together, along with selected elected officials and representatives for a focused meeting on this issue may be a start.    With so many respondents involved with the NYS GIS Association, it seems like this would be a good place to elevate the issue to a broader audience.
  3. GIS/Geospatial firms appear to becoming smaller and with government contracting being less of priority and more of a focus on industry and business contracting.  At the foundation of this is the burgeoning grassroots startup companies focusing on the mobile/smartphone market of which all respondents state will be a priority business development environment in the next 2-4 years.    Business and industry will follow the money trail – little of which is coming out of the New York public sector right now.  Smaller firms have pros and cons, but at the end of the day, efforts to promote and use their services are important. Several smaller firms are a MWBE.
  4. Removal of GIS services via state OGS contract was echoed and viewed by many respondents as detrimental to business.  Though this is not a new issue and has been discussed in the Albany circles prior, at least these results solidify the concern among the consulting community.  This needs to change.
  5. While there is a reoccurring theme in government about the need to educate elected officials and decision makers about the benefits of GIS – industry and business respondents feel the same way.  As if we need to start anew every election cycle.  One small change is offered by the author:  The awareness and benefits of geospatial also need to be conveyed to the business community as well.  On a reoccurring basis. Systematically.
  6. A lack of “GIS education and awareness” was voiced broadly as a concern from the survey respondents.   We tend to often talk about this within government with regard to educating politicians, decision makers and even the general public about the benefits of GIS.  Interestingly the business community sees this same issue raising the question, if not the possibility, that such outreach efforts could be more fruitful if done together  (government and business).  Perhaps.
  7. With the intent of not sounding like an academic, I submit that more research and analysis is needed on the statewide GIS/Geospatial business community.  While results of this survey may only begin to understanding the evolving nature of the more recognized traditional GIS consulting market, better alignment and understanding of larger statewide firms such as IBM, Verizon, Cablevision, among others, in the GIS space also is warranted. To say the least of the escalating “start-up” technologies entering the GIS/geospatial space.  The big business companies rarely interact with the traditional GIS community and the impact of the smaller “start-up” community is relatively unknown.   Umbrellas organizations such as the New York Business Council also need further nurturing.
  8. The need for additional funding for GIS/Geospatial development was noted by several respondents.  Data from the survey suggests the GIS consultant community is looking more and more to business and industry for contracts and revenue due to the dearth of government grants and annual tax-payer spending in the GIS arena.  Options to establish traditional grant funding programs to support the statewide geospatial community currently appear to be suspect though recent programs like the New York Certified Business Incubator and Innovation Hot Spot Program through the Empire State Development Office illustrate how the geospatial business community could be expanded in a similar fashion.  With a little thought out choreography, one would have to assume there would be a positive “bump” in expanded statewide geospatial business activity associated with the Unmanned Aerial Systems (drones) research work at the Griffiss Air Force Base in Rome, N.Y.   At press time, suitors to champion this cause are still TBD.
  9. The role of MWBE firms in the statewide GIS/Geospatial business arena is limited.   The survey only recorded seven MWBEs with very little federal, state and local government work associated with this group.   Most of the focus appears now to be with business and industry though closer analysis of individual responses in this cohort indicates this may be due to the work of the newer, smaller, start-up MWBE tech companies.  With most government contracts requiring at least some level effort to reference or include MWEB firms, this is one group that should have an expanded presence in the statewide GIS/Geospatial projects.  If procurement does not improve within the public sector, expect a continue migration of their work to the greener pastures of business and industry.
  10. And finally, there remains a significant lack of interaction, communication, and defined communication between the GIS/Geospatial business community and NYS elected officials and representatives.   This generally supports previous blog posts I have made noting that until the statewide GIS community (both government and industry) evolve and find a way to sharpen their tools to effectively work – and influence – representatives in Albany, our discipline will continue to chase funding bread crumbs.  Sustained funding for a recognized and acknowledged statewide professional – the GIS/Geospatial industry – is still to be realized.

 

Certifications + Competencies: Anybody Listening?

Posted on by
Reply

Every couple years the GIS community perks up for one reason to revisit and debate the importance and worthiness of Geographic Information Systems Professional (GISP) certification.  And more recently there has also been discussion and outreach, albeit among a much smaller community of geospatial professionals, on Geospatial Competency/Maturity Models.  Such is the recent case as the NYS GIS community (as part of the NEARC listserv) were asked  to jump in and contribute to an online survey  intended to “to get some idea of how widely GIS certifications have been adopted and promoted within organizations that use GIS technology or services at any level”.   The listserv posting states that results of the survey will be summarized and presented next month at the 2014 GIS-Pro Conference in New Orleans.

Not the first time the GIS community has been asked to weigh in and offer opinions on the GISP issue and my bet is that the results will continue to vary greatly based on respondent criteria such as years of GIS experience, management and supervisory responsibilities, and even type of employer (i.e., public, private, nonprofit, academic, etc.).  A simple Google search on “worth/value of GISP Certification” will result in a long list of articles on the subject from both individuals and online trade magazines.  Most of the online discussion will support and speak to the value of GISP Certification.  Which should come as no surprise as many of the opinion gathering efforts on this particular issue have been surveys of GIS industry personnel.  (Isn’t this called surveying the choir?)  There is the occasional descending opinion though this is normally the exception.    As a long-time GIS manager here in New York State I see both sides of the debate.  And yes, I did respond to the recent online GIS Certification questionnaire.

There are also recent and ongoing efforts to solicit comments on the 2010 Geospatial Technology Competency Model (GTCM) which has been on the back burner for the last couple years.   And I’d be surprised there is much awareness of the model throughout the NYS geospatial community.  Originally proposed by the University of Southern Mississippi’s Geospatial Workforce Development Center, the GTMC concept was an initial effort in the early 2000s to define geospatial industry skills and competencies.  This work  led to the first draft of the GTCM which was peer reviewed  by the Spatial Technologies Information Association (STIA) –  around the same time  STIA received a $700,000 grant from the Dept. of Labor to “promote spatial technologies industry”.    Interestingly, STIA doesn’t even seem to be around anymore.

Work continued on the GTCM and in early 2009 members of the National Geospatial Technology Center of Excellence (GeoTech Center) became involved in the effort to complete the GTCM.  As it goes, a panel of geospatial experts were brought together to further define the many components of the GTCM model.    Public comments were sought and comments were addressed with a final GTCM draft submitted to the U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration (DOLETA) Geospatial Technology Competency Model.  The draft was approved by DOLETA in 2010.

Approximately during the same timeframe and to further muddle efforts to define  geospatial industry standards,  the University Consortium for GIS Science got into them mix by publishing the Geographic Information Science and Technology Body of Knowledge in 2006.  It’s not real clear where this publication and effort went, if anywhere, in context of industry acceptance and promotion.  This publication was reissued in late 2012 by ESRI and the Association of American Geographers (AAG).   UCGIS is revisiting the book of knowledge as part of a 2014-2015 effort.

Since 2010 there have been focused efforts to promote the worthiness of the GTCM including David Debiase’s (ESRI) 2012 Directions Magazine article entitled “Ten Things You Need to Know about the Geospatial Technology Competency Model”.   The GTCM model is not for the meek and a challenge to work through for even the most experienced geospatial professionals.  I’ve been in the NYS geospatial space for a long, long time and I’ve never been involved in a GTCM focused discussion.  Or even aware of one.

Championed largely by GeoTech academics and DOLETA staff, GTCM was created to become an important resource “for defining the geospatial industry and a valuable tool for educators creating programs”.   The model specifies foundational (Tiers 1-3), industry-wide (Tier 4), and industry sector-specific (Tier 5) expertise characteristic of the various occupations that comprise the geospatial industry.   Descriptions of individual geospatial occupations, including occupation-specific competencies and job requirements (Tiers 6-8), are published in DOLETA’s O*NET occupation database (http://www.onetonline.org/).

URISA continues to make significant efforts to contribute to the GTCM concept.  In 2013 URISA published two documents:  (1) the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) and (2) the GIS Capability Maturity Model (GISCMM).   The GMCM focuses on just Tier 9 of the GTCM and specifies 74 essential competencies and 18 competency areas that characterize the work of most successful managers in the geospatial industry. It is not intended to be an exhaustive inventory of all pertinent competencies, such as those specific to particular work settings. Instead, the GMCM seeks to distill a concise list that is widely applicable, and readily adaptable to evolving industry needs.  The GISCMM was published as part of the newly formed URISA GIS Management Institute (GMI).

The GISCMM provides a first-ever framework for assessing not only the capability of an enterprise GIS operation, but also the process maturity of those who manage and operate the GIS. It includes 23 enabling capability assessment components, which include the sorts of assets that a GIS operation acquires. The Model also includes 22 execution ability assessment components, which include the key processes that are required to manage and operate an enterprise GIS. URISA states GISCMM will help organizations assess the development stage of their GIS and the process maturity level of their operations.  This assessment will help them target priority capability enhancement s and process improvements.  GIS staff responsible for operations and management will be able to use both the GISCMM and the GMCM to assess their own professional strengths and weakness and to identify training and other professional development priorities.

Honorable goals and intent, no doubt, but at the end of the day, a daunting concept for statewide GIS managers to get their arms around and champion in their respective organizations.

 So What’s All This Mean to the NYS Geospatial Community?

At this point, I think one would be challenged to find any real broad based discussion on the GISP Certification here in the Empire State.  Other than a show of hands as to who has GISP Certification at the bi-annual NYS state conference, the discussion doesn’t go much farther.  Instead of it being ongoing fodder for discussion among the choir at national conferences, perhaps in time, groups like the NYGIS Association Professional Development Committee could bring the topic down to earth and focus on what it really means here in New York.  Beyond discussion among my peers, GISP Certification has meant little to me personally in context of expanded professional recognition.  Though noted, this is just me – in the twilight of my professional career with Westchester County.

Inasmuch the GIS community wants GISP Certification to mean something, to cause change, to somehow better recognize or legitimize our work and services – little has been done in the institutional framework in which the geospatial community works and operates.  For example, or at least in government, one of the most meaningful and long lasting impacts will come when GISP credentials finally mean something to Human Resource managers and/or incorporated in civil service titles.  There has been only minimal progress in this regard across the state.

Unlike recognized professional credentials such as Professional Engineer (PE) and Project Management Professional (PMP) – ones that we most often run into in the geospatial arena – government attorneys and contract administrators will continue to be reluctant of adding new requirements to Request for Proposals (RFP) such as “GISP” when benefits of such are not clearly understood and recognized or do not have any financial or legal basis.   The model may be a little different in business and industry.  Yes, it may behoove consultants to show GISPs on staff to make their company credentials better than the next, but at the end of the day, organizations requesting GIS contract support want the most cost effective solution to get the job done – with or without GISP Certification.  Most likely until GISP Certification discussion turns into  institutional acceptance – by the organizations which hire and employ geospatial professionals – the banter of GISP Certification self-worth will continue.

Discussion – or actually the lack of – on Competence/Maturity Models in New York State is another issue.  Hard to explain given the broad publicity the issue has been given at professional conferences, URISA publications, academia, and uber expansive publications like ESRI’s ArcNews.  But it probably speaks to the point noted above the discussion continues to be within a very small audience.    Missing is meaningful and aggregated input from the grass roots level at all levels of NYS government.  Input is needed from GIS managers and supervisors who cannot afford to attend conferences.  Those who cannot serve on committees for one reason or another or simply do not have the time.  GIS administrators in 2014 publically funded, budget strapped organizations just trying to keep the lights on.  Yes, the new models speak to sustainability and revenue streams, but to introduce this discussion in 2014 in organizations which are constantly being asked to move programs to the Cloud, consider outsourcing or additional vendor support, or simply dropping selected program elements altogether, seems almost too much to ask?  In most local organizations across the state, there is very little context, or ability to start Competency/Maturity Model discussions.  Return-on-Investment (ROI) numbers are great to the extent staff and resources are available to prepare and conduct them; unfortunately I don’t see much of this across the NYS GIS landscape.   And given the complexity of the models and the need for administrative, management, financial, and  human resources to be included in the Competency/Maturity Models discussion, bringing these topics as  workshops or training sessions to the state conferences (bi-annual and/or Geospatial Summit) would only be scratching the surface towards institutional  understanding and implementation.  Finding the right conduit to bring all the right and necessary players the table will continue to be a huge lift.  For that matter, just who are the right people to bring to the discussion at the local and county levels?

(BTW, most wouldn’t know it, but the State of New York completed its own Geospatial Maturity Assessment (GMA) last fall.)

Conclusion

Both the GISP Certification and Geospatial Competency/Maturity Model discussions certainly have relevance here in New York State,   but considerable work lies ahead towards incorporating the concepts into the institutional and administrative frameworks before any meaningful “professional” acceptance and recognition will be realized as part of the business of doing GIS.     Until then, it will be business as usual.   Many good deeds have been done by both URISA and the GeoTech Center but the work and concept will fall short if not packaged and promoted in a user-friendly manner which is of consequential and realistic to resource-strapped NYS local government GIS programs.  There are no URISA Chapters in New York State, so both the GISP Certification and Competency/Maturity Models will need to be advocated through other means and partners.  For example the NYS GIS Association’s Educational and  Professional Development Committees are sponsoring and upcoming webinar entitled “Revitalizing GIST Community College Programs” part of which is relevant to the GTCM.  Other than this, the collective messages on both of these “GIS relevancy” issues are limited and probably in need of an extreme makeover.

Other webinars, email blasts, online surveys, conference workshops and announcements will surely follow on these subject matters.  And the debate will continue. The real challenge will be to see if the New York geospatial community will take notice and listen.  Or even have the means to do so?  Or even care.

GIS Summertime Blues

Posted on by
Reply

My optimism for 2014-2015 State level GIS program development went south as early as January of this year as part of Governor Cuomo’s State of the State Address  on January 9th.  I’ve reread the 10-page speech several times looking for something to feel good about while wearing my GIS hat.  Each time though, a big zero.  Nada.  Based on the content of the 2014 Address, as well the previous three years of this administration, even the most optimistic GIS professional would need a wild imagination to think geospatial is on the Governor’s radar screen or that he has given the State Chief Technology Officer (Kishor Bagul) –   who has oversight of the State’s Geographic Information Officer –  the green light in moving forward towards building state level GIS capacity.  And that’s not just State government programs – but statewide – including county, regional, and local governments (cities, towns, and villages).

It would seem all that remains in the hollow geospatial speak of the Office for Information Technology Serivces  (ITS) public relations machine – IT Transformation, Clusters/Governance/consolidations, and an organizational chart that is mind-numbing -are just fragments of a State level geospatial program that was probably better off ten years ago.  One can dig a little deeper and find a copy of the 2014-2017 NYS IT Strategic Plan published last month in which under Goal 2: Strengthening Our Service to Agencies is an initiative itemized as Next Generation Geographic Information Systems (GIS).    The project narrative reads  “ITS is developing a bold new strategy to build on existing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) capabilities within the NYS GIS Clearinghouse (www.gis.ny.gov) to create a centralized, state -of-the-art suite of shared resources that can be used by all agencies and members of the public. The enterprise strategy for GIS will create a new tier of technology to harness the network of currently isolated GIS resources using web services that can be widely shared and reused by a whole host of stakeholders”.  Unfortunately the reference to a very out-of-date www.gis.ny.us website as a jumping off point for this proposed initiative makes one wonder how deep the NextGen GIS discussion actually went.  But maybe that’s just me.

So, with little to get excited about in the Governor’s January 2014 speech,  I took a step back over the next several months  to monitor any legislation that might be introduced  by members of the NYS Legislature that would include either direct or indirect funding to support statewide GIS/geospatial program development.  An initial summary and analysis of current NYS legislation which contains a geospatial component was the focus of my February 2014 blog post.   Little has changed since then and beyond current pieces of legislation which contain a “mapping” component  in the areas of Alzheimer’s, autism, and breast cancer research among others,  there is no legislation which will specifically help build and expand geospatial capacity across the state.  With last Legislative session now behind us, here’s an exhaustive summary of what went down.

Of course had any pro-GIS/geospatial legislation been introduced or passed during the 2014 Legislative session it would be more by accident than by design as the NYS geospatial community has no formalized advocacy in the political and legislative arena.  Which goes to show you that GIS legislation/funding in New York is still a game of chance versus a well-choreographed legislative agenda by the statewide GIS constituency.  Maybe outreach and work within the legislative arena might ultimately evolve from the NYS GIS Association?  Maybe.

So what does all this lack of State level government and legislative support mean for GIS programs across the state?   It means that beyond providing the staples of orthophotos and addresses, it’s doubtful that any additional geospatial infrastructure is going to be created at the State level in the foreseeable future.   Which actually may not be all that bad.  One could argue that future statewide funding and legislative support is probably better spent at the local level anyway.   Beyond the old school GIS commodities noted above, most State governments have limited involvement with the primary day-to-day geospatial business needs of county, city, town, and village GIS programs – particularly in the areas of infrastructure management (drinking water, storm and sanitary systems, utilities), permitting, code enforcement, and inspection activities, planning and zoning, land records/tax mapping, and supporting local public safety programs (fire and police).  Yes, there is some overlap in functions and business needs, but not a lot.

Geospatial architecture and infrastructure which supports local programs is much different today.  The Cloud, mobile apps, GIS functionality in COTS business software, a significantly reduced government workforce, mash-ups, content everywhere on the internet, crowdsourcing for everything, and so forth have changed the landscape.  All these factors, both collectively and individually, have significantly changed how local governments use and apply the technology.   And in doing so, it seems to further suggest that the conventional thinking of investing at the State level to support local government GIS programs needs to be revisited?   Or abandoned?  If the State really wants to make a difference in the local geospatial arena, invest in the public health and social services  systems – both of which are State mandated and two of the costliest budgets items in county government.   Across the state.  Any integrated (state-local) geospatial solutions in these program areas will have widespread applicability and impact.

I certainly don’t know what the future looks like for State government GIS program areas, but I do know for the near future most local GIS programs will continue to fend for themselves and require to be self-funded.  Or at least until the day we – as a community and network of statewide GIS programs – are successful in establishing sustaining legislative and financial support for our programs.

It’s said that the Geospatial Summit is a conference designed for out-of-the-box thinkers. Might I suggest that if there is no progress on funding any statewide geospatial initiatives by the next Summit, a spokesperson from Kickstarter be invited as part of 2016 agenda?   Why not?

Hey, you never know.

Meetups, MOOCs, and Hackers, Oh My!

Posted on by
Reply

As a community of users and programs, we are constantly searching for ways to broaden and expand the use of GIS/geospatial technologies in our areas of influence.  While I’ve written previously in eSpatiallyNewYork about the NYS geospatial community’s need to expand outreach in professional circles and disciplines (engineering, public works, health industries, retail, etc.), there is a large and increasing number of GIS/geospatial individuals,  or even companies for that matter, who are not necessarily aligned with the traditional “GIS community”.  Or at least the traditional community of users which we have come to recognize and know over the past two decades.

This is a new and evolving community of geospatial users very different from the first generation of GIS/geospatial users which came together in the 80s/90s representing government and government contractors to create the initial statewide organizational framework (i.e., annual conferences, regional GIS user group meetings, NYS Coordinating Body, etc).  For years, the act of collaborating and communicating the geospatial message required attending meetings and conferences.   You had to be there.  It was the only venue there was.

But as we know now, the internet has fundamentally changed all of this and at the same time has dramatically increased the number of geospatial users and consumers. Individuals joining our space from many different angles and reasons such as starting a mid-life career change, engaging as a community activist,  Millennial generation programmers leveraging  public domain geospatial datasets to build mobile/smartphone applications, or the many simply participating in internet-based continuing education programs.   Connecting virtually and joining the geospatial fray via social media, MindMixer, blogs, hackathons, code sharing, and the many other available online user forums. Even through LinkedIn.

One online venue growing in popularity and offering geospatial enthusiasts the opportunity to interact, exchange ideas, collaborate, and to meet, is Meetup.com. There are Meetup groups for nearly everything imaginable, but just in the metropolitan New York City area alone, there are several “geo” groups with combined memberships already well into the thousands.   One group I’ve joined (GeoNYC) now has over 1,000 members.  A thousand! Some other groups in the metropolitan area include NYC Open Data (1,800 members), Crisismappers NYC (140+ members), and GeoDev NYC (which is essentially supported by ESRI) with 600+ members.  There also Meetup groups for OpenStreetMap NYC , Maptime NYC, and nyhacker (2,600+ members).  The New York Big Data Workshop group has had 384 members join just since February of this year.  Granted many individuals are probably members of multiple groups and not all of these groups are totally focused on GIS/geospatial, but the numbers are still pretty impressive.   It’s definitely a new culture of collaboration and working together – and I doubt many of the “geo” Meetup.com Nation have attend or participate in either of the two major statewide GIS conferences (NYS Annual Conference and NYS Geospatial Summit).    (The last time I was at a Meetup I overheard a conversation between two individuals communicating solely by their screen names!)

Conceptually similar, though phenomenally different, consider the  thousands of individuals now chasing and taking part in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC).  For example, one of the more visible and successful MOOCs was the 5-week MOOC, Maps and the Geospatial Revolution, taught Summer 2013 by Dr. Anthony Robinson of Penn State. Dr. Robinson was the keynote at the Spring 2014 Annual GIS-SIG meeting held in Pittsford, New York.   Over 47,000 students enrolled – of which according to Dr. Robinson 1,068 were from New York State – and over 35,000 students participated, making it the largest GIS course ever taught. (Wonder how many of the 1,068 registered are members of the NYGIS Association?) The same MOOC course is currently being offered and is in session now. Here in Westchester County, Dr. Peggy Minnis at Pace University offered a MOOC entitled “GIS 101” during Spring 2013 semester which led to 810 individuals registering for the course.  Dr. Minnis noted that about 150 of the 810 never logged in while another 150 worked fairly regularly through the weekly assignments. The latter group became the core of the active learners.  (And a follow-up course “GIS Basics” was offered Fall 2013).    All said, there is no denying the increasing MOOC appeal as a means to presenting basic geospatial concepts to a new and broader user community.  As to the overall benefits and relevance of MOOC coursework,  reference is made to a January 2013 Journal of Higher Education article noting “Course certification rates are misleading and counterproductive indicators of the impact and potential of open online courses”.    (I just saw another MOOC listing in a June 5th Directions Magazine Blog posting:  New MOOC in Beta: Introduction to GIS using Quantum GIS.

And lastly, are our hacker friends.  There are hackers of all types but here I’m referencing the geospatial types.  The new friends of GIS with an edge and attitude.   One does not have to try too hard to find the growing list of GIS and open data related hackathons including, but not limited to, the  ESRI UC Hackathon, Hack Pasedena, City of Austin Hack for Change, Code for Burlington , Colorado/Wyoming Google Hackathon,  NYC BigApps 2014, opendataphilly,  ourimportant and closely aligned disciplines in the architecture, engineering, and construction industry (AEC), and many more.   Any other Google search on “geohacker applications” or “geospatial hacker apps” will return yet another long list of specific applications and authors.  Take a look.   A completely different, and often awesome, ad hoc approach to geospatial application development.  Hard to quantify the numbers but they are there.   Maybe in the cubicle/office pod next to you or in the basement next door.  And what do they do?  Maybe best defined from the  Hacker wiki:

  • Hacker:  those who make innovative customizations or combinations of retail electronic and computer equipment
  • Hacker:  those who combine excellence, playfulness, cleverness and exploration in performed activities

There is a whole new and expanding community of geospatial users amongst us and it’s my guess we’re only beginning to scratch the surface on identifying and understanding who they are and how to make a connection.   The big challenge is realizing that many of the new breed are ones using geospatial on the fringe, innocuously, and not necessarily in establish groups or programs.  Probably solo on the internet, sometimes just a screen name, developing and sharing – and then leaving.  GIS rogue.  But at the end of the day new and refreshing.  And contributing to the common geospatial good.

There are lots of individuals engaged in these new spaces and the Empire State GIS community would do well to take note.

The Blue Highways of GIS: Annandale-on-Hudson, New York

Posted on by
Reply

The Bard College Field Station is located on the Hudson River near Tivoli South Bay and on the mouth of the Saw Kill. Its location affords research and teaching access to freshwater tidal marshes, swamps and shallows, perennial and intermittent streams, young and old deciduous and coniferous forests, old and mowed fields, and other habitats. A library, herbarium, laboratories, classroom, and offices are open to undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, and environmental researchers by prior arrangement. Also based at the field station are laboratories and offices of Hudsonia Ltd., an environmental research institute. The Field Station is owned by the College and operated with support from  Hudsonia and other public and private funding sources.

Founded in 1981, Hudsonia is a not-for-profit institute for research, education, and technical assistance in the environmental sciences. Staff scientists, applying long experience in regional ecology and natural history, collect and analyze data and recommend measures to reduce or mitigate impacts of land development on the local environment. While biological sciences and research is at the foundation of the Hudsonia mission, geospatial technology provides tools which are used extensively throughout its programs.

Leading the GIS mapping efforts with Hudsonia is Gretchen Stevens who has been with the organization for 24 years. Receiving her B.S. in Environmental Conservation from the University of New Hampshire, Gretchen is a botanist and is self-taught in using GIS software with Hudsonia which has standardized on the ESRI platform. She is Director of Hudsonia’s Biodiversity Resources Center and has over 34 years’ experience in remote sensing, habitat assessments, habitat mapping, rare plant surveys, and other field biology in the Northeast. She manages the GIS laboratory at Hudsonia, curates the Bard College Field Station Herbarium, and supervises the Habitat Mapping and Biodiversity Education programs.

Over the past 13 years Gretchen has led and produced a significant amount of GIS work in the lower Hudson River Valley for the benefit  of local governments and organizations which would otherwise have been unable to take advantage of geospatial technology. Of particular focus in her work has been the use of GIS to support detailed mapping of ecologically significant habitats throughout towns in Dutchess and Ulster counties, as well as selected watersheds and stream corridors in Orange County (Trout Brook and Woodbury Creek), Schoharie, Albany, and Greene Counties (Catskill Creek) and Fishkill Creek in Dutchess County.

Hudsonia’s approach to most of their habitat mapping efforts has been similar by combining desktop ArcGIS tools, including the analysis of common data layers such as bedrock and surficial geology data, topography, and soils, with the interpretation of color infrared aerial photography to predict the occurrence of ecologically significant habitats. Gretchen notes:

 “These projects involve lots of detailed, hands-on remote sensing analysis and lots of field work – both of those aspects help to distinguish the final products from most other maps in the public domain. By “hands-on” I mean that we do not rely on mapping software to interpret our spatial data such as geology, topography, soils, and aerial imagery. We visually pore over the spatial data ourselves to arrive at our habitat predictions, and then digitize the boundaries ourselves (click-click-click) onscreen. And then we visit as many areas as possible to answer our questions.”

Illustrative to the high quality of work, many of Hudsonia’s GIS products are incorporated into local master plans, open space plans, and local land use policies. For example, in Dutchess County, the towns of Amenia, Clinton, Hyde Park, Rhinebeck, and Woodstock in Ulster County, have incorporated Hudsonia’s habitat mapping information into local comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and/or review procedures for land development projects. Conservation Advisory Councils (CAC) in the towns of Beekman and Rhinebeck have been using Hudsonia’s GIS mapping data and habitat reports to make presentations to Planning Boards about biodiversity concerns associated with proposed projects.

Town of Clinton Significant Habitats

Town of Clinton Significant Habitat Mapping

The Woodstock habitat map, augmented by many other publicaly available geospatial datasets, has enabled the Woodstock Land Conservancy to prepare a Strategic Conservation Plan (completed in 2013) for their service area, which includes Woodstock and neighboring towns. Hudsonia is also helping the Town of Ancram prepare a Natural Resources Conservation Plan which includes a series of 20 GIS maps depicting such elements as bedrock and surficial geology, elevations, farmland soils, aquifers, unusual habitats, and conservation priorities throughout the town.

Ancram Habitat Mapping

Town of Ancram Significant Habitat Mapping

2014 is year three of a five-year collaboration with biologist Jason Tesauro on a project that uses grazing dairy cows to restore habitat for the bog turtle (an Endangered species in New York) at a site in Dutchess County. The project includes the radio tracking of turtles and monitoring the vegetation changes. Hudsonia biologists and interns collect GPS data while tracking turtles and use  ArcGIS Tracking Analyst to create maps showing the movements of each turtle through the tracking season, overlaid on an orthophoto image. Cool stuff.

Smaller_BogTurtleHudsonia_Page_1

Bog Turtle mapping and tracking in Dutchess County

Praise for Hudsonia’s GIS work at the local level is widespread. “The Woodstock Planning Board has adopted the Hudsonia map as our official town map and the planning board uses the map on the big screen at all our meetings so the public can see what issues the planning board is looking at” offers Peter Cross, a member of the Woodstock Planning Board, “I use the Hudsonia biodiversity map all the time as part of my work as the Woodstock Wetlands and Watercourse Inspector.” Across the Hudson River in Rhinebeck, Michael Trimble, current chair of the Town of Rhinebeck Planning Board, and Interim Zoning Enforcement Officer notes “Gretchen and Hudsonia do remarkable work and our area has benefited from their efforts.” Additionally, Cliff Schwark, Chairman of the Town of Beekman CAC replies “My best description of Gretchen Stevens is that she is a true professional in her field, an excellent educator, always helpful and a pleasure to work with. The results of their work were excellent, on time, and at cost and have proven to be valuable to the Town of Beekman.” In the Town of Clinton, Norene Coller comments “We are very fortunate in Dutchess County to have an organization with the knowledge of native species and difficult to observe small habitats as well as GIS capabilities to help communities make important land-use decisions”.

While she and her colleagues at Hudsonia have made presentations on their GIS-based work at venues such as the NYS Wetlands Forum, the Northeast Natural History Conference, and the Association of American Geographers – there has been limited interaction with the larger and existing statewide GIS community. Nonetheless, she remains a dedicated member of the statewide geospatial community who works meticulously with little notoriety beyond the Hudson Valley communities she serves.

Gretchen and her work with Hudsonia illustrates the role of similar nonprofits which fill a geospatial role providing support to conservation agencies and smaller, more rural governments typical of the mid-Hudson River communities where they work, often with organizations with very limited, if any, technical staff and largely being supported through grant funds and private foundations.

Gretchen summarizes  “Our GIS capability has enabled us to gather and analyze huge amounts of physical and biological data, and has greatly advanced our understanding of the Hudson Valley ecological landscape. In addition to expanding our research on the known and likely occurrences of rare plants and animals and their habitats, GIS has allowed us to convey a giant body of information about significant habitats to landowners, land trusts, and municipal and state agencies who can put it right to use in protecting the most sensitive areas.”

Just another person working the smaller venues across the Empire State.   Thinking Globally, Acting Locally.   Number 177 under “S” on the NYS Clearinghouse Who’s Who in GIS Listing by Alphabetical.

Gretchen Stevens and others along the Blue Highways of GIS.

Thanks for reading and see you down the road.

Survey of New York State GIS/Geospatial Industry

Posted on by
Reply

I am in the process of gathering data via an online survey (SurveyMonkey) focusing on the GIS/Geospatial industry in New York State. Information and data collected will be summarized and presented in a future post of this blog, as well as hopefully starting the discussion in a broader context within the statewide GIS community on the 2014 GIS/Geospatial business landscape. Government sponsored GIS programs are struggling with funding often being reduced or even eliminated, the mobile/smartphone and Cloud environments appear to present great promise (really?), and the broad GIS/Geospatial business community seems to be working longer and harder for less money. Where is it all heading? What does the GIS/Geospatial business community have to say? What needs to be changed, if at all?

In addition to gathering data from traditional GIS/geospatial service providers, new start-up companies in the mobile/smartphone and social media environment supporting GIS/geospatial applications are also encouraged to participate. I am also interested in hearing from GIS/geospatial companies supporting the health and human services, public safety, retail and banking, and communication industries. I am casting a broad net in attempting to reach and make contact with GIS/Geospatial business community (listservs, user groups, business contacts, etc.) – if you know of a firm doing GIS/Geospatial business in New York State – please feel to pass along information about the survey.

If your firm is interested in participating in the survey, please respond to espatiallynewyork@gmail.com and a link to the online survey will be emailed back to you. It is a short survey which should take about 15-minutes to complete.

sam

Spring 2014 GIS Conference Deals

Posted on by
Reply

Spring is one of my favorite times of the year for a bunch of reasons.   March Madness, Major League Baseball season begins (sorry Yanks & Mets fans, having been raised outside of Cleveland, I’m a hapless lifelong Indians fan – which is a curse) and the public golf courses in Westchester County open late March!  But this Spring is particularly sweet as we finally begin to sense and feel an end to the brutal and seemingly endless winter we’ve all suffered through over the past several months.

Over on the geospatial front, Spring also offers some of my favorite one-day GIS conferences held in locations which are easily accessible to the Empire State  geospatial community.     These one-day conferences are user-friendly, light on registration fees, provide excellent networking opportunities among colleagues and industry representatives,  provide good content, and minimize overall travel expenses – which is significant due to the substantial travel restrictions many GIS professionals are currently dealing with across the state.

Three Spring 2014 regional GIS conferences and meetings worth considering include:

GIS-SIG 23rd Annual Conference, April 15th, Rochester, NY.   GIS-SIG is the long standing western New York geospatial educational user group whose primary mission is to “foster the understanding of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) technology.”   GIS/SIG provides a professional forum in the Rochester – Genesee Finger Lakes region for GIS education, data sharing, communication and networking with other local, state and national users, dissemination of information about trends and policies related to GIS, and technology advancement.  With a loyal membership and Board of Directors, the size and content of the GIS/SIG conference is broad enough to often substitute as an  annual state conference for many GIS practitioners in the western half of the state.  The conference boasts a wide range of vendors and presentations involving government, industry and business, nonprofits, and contributions from the many academic institutions in the Rochester-Buffalo corridor.  Corporate sponsorship keeps the price tag of an individual registration at under a $100 for the day which also includes lunch.   Online registration is available and while you are at the GIS/SIG website you can also see the many resources and links GIS/SIG provides to its user community.

Northeast Arc User Group (NEARC) Meeting, May 13th, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.  Though not in New York State, the Spring NEARC meeting is conveniently located in Amherst, MA which is easily accessible to the Albany Capital District and GIS professionals in eastern New York State. Once considered the smaller venue of the NEARC suite of annual conferences, Spring NEARC grew too large at its original site at Smith College in Northampton, MA and moved to a larger venue at the University of Massachusetts.  Unlike the GIS/SIG conference which is software vendor independent, this show is very much ESRI centric though is packed with high quality user presentations, well attended by ESRI business partners, and has grown to be so popular that the show competes with the larger annual three-day NEARC Conference held in the fall and other similar New England GIS shows.   This is a great one-day conference, well attended, great user content, easy access, lots of opportunities to meet industry representatives and ESRI regional staff,  professional networking,  and includes lunch – all for $45.  If your organization is an ESRI shop – this is a Spring show not to miss.

Westchester GIS User Group Meeting, May 15th, Purchase College, Purchase New York.  As one of the largest geospatial meetings in southeastern New York State,  the Westchester GIS User Group Meeting is a free one-day conference held at Purchase College.  Made possible by financial support from exhibiting vendors and conference facilities through the college, the 2014 event includes a wide range of user presentations,  a specific PDH (Professional Development Hour) user track for engineers,  afternoon workshops, coffee breaks for networking,  and both a student poster contest and on-campus geogaching and orienteering contest.  The Purchase College location provides easy one-day access across the metropolitan NYC area, including the lower Hudson River Valley and also southeastern Connecticut. While a preliminary agenda has already been posted, it will be updated on a regular basis leading up to the day of the meeting.

So, if overnight travel and expenses are simply not available, fret not – there are regional geospatial meetings and conferences which are accessible from most areas of the state – which provide many of the same benefits of larger shows – and at the same time are easy on the wallet.  It’s worth considering these and other smaller shows to support your professional development efforts and outreach.  At the end of the day, it will be worth your while and you’ll be supporting both your colleagues and the industry representatives which support our Empire State GIS programs.

Still Working in the Shadows

Posted on by
Reply

A few weeks ago, Linda Rockwell (Mohawk Valley GIS) posted to the GISNY listserv making reference to a short conversation she recently had with an elected federal representative. As it turns out, the representative she was talking with did not know what “GIS” or Geographic Information Systems stood for even though he was active on committees in Washington dealing with Transportation and STEM issues.  For those of us who have been working in GIS in New York State for many years, Linda’s encounter does not come as a surprise.  By no means was it the first time, nor will it be the last, a GIS practitioner in New York State came away from a conversation scratching his or her head thinking “How can that politician possibly not know what GIS is about or the value of what we do?!”  Reason:  one of our most significant limitations as a statewide community of GIS professionals is that we have been incredibly slow in terms of delivering an effective and lasting “message” to elected officials concerning the role of geospatial technology in government and business.  While there are pockets of successful GIS projects across the state, due largely on local and sustaining political support, widespread legislative awareness of the technology has never been truly realized.

So What’s Missing?

In context of advancing as a professional discipline, look no further than similar organizations across the state as part of their efforts in representing membership and professional interests to elected officials.    And really, no Madison Avenue magic is involved – just very specific outreach and polished marketing to the Legislature as part of creating legislative agendas.   For example, current efforts by NYS professional organizations which benefit from the development of geospatial technology include:

  • New York State Society of Professional Engineers:  Always at the top of my list here in Westchester County.   Their influence is broad and at the end of the day their involvement and use of geospatial data is endless.  And they always host great golf tournaments.
  • New York State Association of Chiefs of Police:  Many years ago as a rookie GIS Manager I was told by a superior that when justifying or pitching a GIS budget I should always have the Police and Fire Chief standing next me.  Some of the best guidance I ever received which still resonates today.    We’ve spent many years carefully nurturing our relationships with these disciplines which have proven to be incredibly fruitful.
  • New York State County Highway Superintendents Association:  What a winter for roads across the region.  One of the few places where grant funding is still to be found, transportation networks are a staple for GIS programs statewide supporting many emerging geospatial applications in vehicle tracking, mobile mapping, inspections and work order/permit processing.  Transportation and public works departments make great GIS allies.  Take note of their annual legislative approach:  membership showing up in mass in Albany and then head to the chambers to see their representatives.  If there is some kind of YouTube video of this annual event, it would make a great training video for the NY GIS Association.
  • New York State School Board Association:  I’m still at a loss as to why after so many of GIS development across state the GIS/geospatial community has not aligned itself closer to our public school systems. Particularly at the local level where we are competing for the same tax dollar and there are so many areas of mutual interest including demographic analysis, demographic analysis, facilities management and public safety programs, and student transportation applications among others.  And this has nothing to do with GIS in the classroom which is still a work in progress at best.  You can be assured the Legislature will hear the NYSSBA 2014 legislative agenda loud and clear.
  • New York Farm Bureau:  I’ve recently written on the growing number of areas in the agricultural space where the traditional GIS community can expand collaborative efforts.  The NYFB legislative priorities augment the recently passed federal farm bill (The Agriculture Act of 2014) which authorizes agricultural, environmental and community assistance programs through the end of fiscal year 2018 and contains provisions that support infrastructure and the environment.   I bet the NYS GIS community can find a way to get involved.
  • New York State Association of Professional Land Surveyors:  While their website is a bit out of date in context of 2013/2014 information, NYAPLS is no stranger to the NYS GIS community based on the many years of debate over the “Surveyor Legislation” which as of January 2014 is in Legislative committee review.    With an organization of comparable membership numbers to the NY GIS Association, NYAPLS seems to a decent job in getting its message heard and represented.

Noted, most of these organizations have been established much longer, are vastly better funded, and are represented by legal counsel and supported by lobbyists.  Though the Legislative Committee of the NYS GIS Association has been closely monitoring evolution the “Surveyor Legislation”  over the past couple years, the NYS GIS professional community can learn much from the inner-workings of these organizations on how to build effective legislative agenda programs.

Is There Any Relevant NYS 2014 GIS Legislation?

Kinda.  Maybe a little by accident and a little by design.   Ironically in stark contrast to Linda’s concern that elected officials don’t really know about GIS and its still “our secret”, there actually is legislation currently under review in the NYS Legislature which has either specific mapping language or relies to some degree on geospatial technology.  Speaking as one who was a member of the New York State GIS Coordinating Body for 17 years (now dba as the GIS Advisory Council) and having routinely attended state conferences and hosted local user group meetings, I can say there has been very little dialog, communication, and/or review of NYS legislative bills by the GIS community – except for the “Surveyor Legislation”.   I doubt much of the NYS GIS community knows little of how these pieces of legislation were submitted, by whom, when, or why.    In showing what is currently on the table, I simply used the online NYS Open Senate legislative search engine using key words such as  “mapping, geographic information systems, and surveying” to generate a list. Some of the proposed bills are more relevant than others and/or have been around a while, but at least the search result can and should be part of the discussion.   Illustrative pieces of legislation aligned with the NYS geospatial disciplines include:

  • Surveyor Legislation:   As noted above – this one is still around.   The NYGIS Association has been tracking and reviewing this piece of legislation for several years primarily with regard to its potential impact on field data collection/mapping with GPS units and the mapping of physical features.
  • Open Data Law:   One of my favorites in context of all discussions and efforts we’ve been hearing relative to “open government” here in NYS.  Not clear how this does/does not augment the Governor’s Executive Order of last year or relates to Open New York – which was actually launched through the efforts of NYS Dept. of Health.  And there are a bunch of new geospatial open data portals to choose from as well.

Conclusions

While I can relate to the conversation Ms. Rockwell had with her representative,  I’d rather propose that our underappreciated “little secret” of GIS is still not a priority in context of the many critical issues elected officials are faced with today,  particularly  in an era of declining staff and financial resources.  Come budget time, the “must-have” case just hasn’t been made in many circles.   We haven’t elevated the collective body of geospatial work to a high enough level of sustained and ongoing political awareness.  And it’s not going to change until the GIS community transforms the manner in which it presents the geospatial message on a much larger stage and can build capacity to conduct business within the legislative framework.

NYS Geospatial Can Grow (and Fly) with Agriculture

Posted on by
Reply

Over the past six months, there have been a myriad of articles in the online trade publications referencing the growth of geospatial technologies in agriculture.  From the growing field of “precision agriculture/ precision farming” or the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs aka “Drones”) the use of geospatial technology is clearly expanding in the agricultural (crop and fruit) disciplines across the State of New York.  There is even the growing field of GeoInsurance which focuses on policy and insurance underwriting covering agricultural lands and programs which are increasingly being viewed as vulnerable due to impacts of climate change and more frequent natural disasters.  However, while there is considerable geospatial growth in the agricultural community, it would appear the traditional NYS GIS community has made only limited headway in context of collaborating and advocating use of the technology with this emerging user community.  A review of papers presented at recent statewide GIS conferences (2013 NYGeoCon) or past GeoSpatial Summits show only a limited number of agriculture related topics and presenters.

One way to frame the potential for building a closer business relationship with the NYS agricultural community is this:  What’s the ceiling for the geospatial technology in one of New York State’s largest industries – covering 23% of the statewide land base, seven million acres, and nearly 36,000 farms?  Or the second-largest producer of wine in the nation contributing to over $3.76 billion in economic benefits to the economy of the state in 2008?   As well as a means to engage students graduating annually from the SUNY system with Certificate, Associate and Bachelor degrees in Agricultural Business, Agricultural Engineering Technology, Agricultural Science, and Agricultural Technology?  And the many agricultural program and research efforts at the Cornell Agriculture and Life Sciences Program (CALS)?

Precision Agriculture:  It can be said that the practice of precision agriculture (PA) was enabled by the advent of Global Positioning System (GPS) technology which ultimately resulted in a farmer’s ability to locate precise locations in the field allowing for the creation of maps – based on a common grid for comparison –  showing and measuring the spatial variability of variables such as crop yield, terrain features/topography, organic matter content, moisture levels, pH, or nitrogen levels among others.  Precision agriculture has also been enabled by technologies like crop yield monitors mounted on GPS equipped combines, seeders, and sprayers – which can have immediate results in reducing overlap and other benefits, not least of which is more timely field work and less operator fatigue.   Illustrative of the growth of PA (crops) in New York State is shown in an online article in DairyBusiness.com – with references to the Western New York Crop Management Association and a Cornell University publication (undated) entitled Precision Agriculture Technology:  New York State’s Adoption, Adaptation, and Future.  Any Google search on “NYS Precision Farming” from the CALS website will generate a long list of articles and examples of PA across the state.   Precision Agriculture is also being promoted through the New York Corn & Soy Growers Association.   Though certainly not the only other additional references on PA in NYS, other informative articles and URLs include:  ESRI’s GIS for Agriculture, the Ohio  Geospatial Program (Agriculture and Natural Resources),  GPS hardware providers  Trimble and Leica, a recent 2013 GCN Magazine article “A Bumper Crop of GIS Maps”, and everyone’s favorite tractor company –  John Deere.  Precision Viticulture (wine) is also the subject of applied research through the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station.

Precision Agriculture includes, GPS, traditional GIS applications, and even Remote Sensing

Precision Agriculture includes, GPS, traditional GIS applications, and even Remote Sensing

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs):  While there is still much debate on the “legal” uses of UVAs (Geospatial-Solutions online articles Nov2013 and Dec2013), UVAs (aka “Drones”) are anticipated to have a dramatic impact on the precision agriculture market as a means to easily capture aerial images for scouting and monitoring crop health such as detecting pests, weeds and nitrogen deficiencies.   Farmers will have the ability to know what’s going on with every plant, spotting problems before they spread, and applying chemicals with precision. They’ll use pesticides and fungicides only when needed and in the smallest amounts necessary, lowering the chemical load in both food and environment and saving money. On smaller farms, farmers can get to this level of precision with hand-tending. But larger farms, the answer is more likely to be with the use of drones.

Drones can also be used to locate cattle and their available forage over large areas, measure crop height, and generate topographic maps and models for land leveling and drainage applications.  In addition, GPS-enabled drones can store precise X,Y coordinates for pictures taken enabling farmers to stitch pictures together more accurately, getting a better image of what’s happening on the ground.  (A much cheaper, quicker, and more accurate alternative than contracting for aerial photography or using lower resolution satellite imagery).    While the current generation of drones (Data Drones) are being used primarily in context of collecting information, the next generation of machines will be capable of proactively protecting crops (Protection Drones) from bugs, birds, disease and other unwanted problems.  Ultimately it is anticipated that drones will evolve to planting sees then applying fertilizers and herbicides – only in precise locations (Seeding and Harvesting Drones).

Drones for agriculture come in many sizes and shapes often weighing under ten pounds.

Drones for agriculture come in many sizes and shapes often weighing under ten pounds.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recently selected the facilities at the Griffiss International Airport, the former Air Force base near Rome, New York as one of six locations in the United States to prototype the development of drones for commercial use.  Aerospace firms and universities in New York and Massachusetts will be involved in the research at Griffiss.  This bodes well for upstate New York as the Association for Unmanned Vehicles International (AUVSI) report The Economic Impact of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the United State shows the economic benefit of UAV integration. AUVSI’s findings show that in the first three years of integration more than 70,000 jobs – including an estimated 2,276 in New York alone – will be created in the United States with an economic impact of more than $13.6 billion.   This benefit will grow through 2025 when we foresee more than 100,000 jobs created and economic impact of $82 billion.  A few days after the selection of the Griffiss site, the first company announced its plans to utilize it for testing. FlyTerra, a New York City firm, is developing drones for use in aerial imaging and terrain data gathering for agricultural and other purposes.

Current FAA rules limit drone operation to under 400 feet and to steer clear of airports and crowds on the ground. But that will change in a couple years as U.S. Congress has mandated the FAA incorporate drones into national airspace by Sept. 30, 2015.  But if you want to jump in right now, you can go buy your own drone at Amazon for under $300 (yes – battery included). Even the more expensive and advanced drones which are being prototyped in agriculture are easily controlled using the Apple IOS or Android smartphones.

GeoInsurance:  Agriculture is an industry which is exposed significantly to climatic risks, and the insurance industry is increasingly using geospatial tools to help analyze and understand weather patterns and climate as part of insurance underwriting.  Remote sensing technologies, in combination with traditional GIS applications, form an integral part of day-to-day risk analysis.  Large geographic predictive models focus on drought forecasting, or other natural disasters such as floods, hurricanes, wild fires, and earthquakes.  Geospatial tools are also being used in claims management and resolution (and to consider the use of drones in this regard in the future?), mitigating risks, fraud detection, as well as overall decision making.    As globalization and increasing catastrophes (both natural and man-made) continue to create risks, more and more complex, geoinformation and location analytics are opening up the insurance industry.  The U.S. GeoInsurance Conference “Enabling Geospatial Technology for Risk and Catastrophe Modelling in Insurance” will be held April 8-9, 2014 in Miami, Florida.  More information on New York farm insurance can be found at the NYS Agriculture & Markets website.

Conclusion:  There is a tremendous upside for the NYS geospatial industry to develop an expanded business and professional relationship with the NYS agricultural community.  From the size of the statewide agricultural industry (including both crop and fruit – including the wine industry), labor and work force numbers, consultants supporting the NYS farming industry, farm equipment dealers, emerging UAV and GeoInsurance industries, and higher education academic and agricultural extension training programs – all collectively present a large potential constituency that should be nurtured by the NYS GIS Association.  It will take some time, but the long term effect should be fruitful.

If all goes well, perhaps one day at a future NYS GIS Conference or Geospatial Summit, attendees will gather outside the conference pavilion pulling up lawn chairs to watch a drone demonstration – all while sipping on a glass of New York State wine!

The Blue Highways of GIS

Posted on by
Reply

One of my all-time favorite books is William Least Heat-Moon’s 1982 classic Blue Highways.   Considered a masterpiece of American travel writing, Blue Highways is Heat-Moon’s personal journey along the nation’s back roads chronicling his curiosity about “those little towns that get on the map – if they get on at all – only because some cartographer has a blank space to fill.”

When published, I saw myself in Blue Highways relating to the wonder and fascination of the open road.  Raised in industrial northern Ohio in the 1950s/1960s, I journeyed westward to attend forestry school at the University of Idaho in Moscow, Idaho, working several years during and after college with the U.S. Forest Service in Idaho, Montana, and the High Sierra in California.   After the Forest Service work, my personal  journey took me back across the country to attend graduate school at the University of Vermont which provided the foundation of my educational work in GIS getting started with ESRI’s earliest software product PIOS (Polygon Information Overlay System) and then on to Westchester County, New York to begin my professional career.    Blue Highways intersected with other parts of my life as Heat-Moon’s journey began (and ended) in Columbia, Missouri –  close to many of my relatives and adjacent to the Wear family farm in Prairie Home, Missouri.   And his journey also went through Moscow where he interviewed a local resident who happened to be a graduate student friend of mine.

Now over thirty years later, and in the fourth quarter of my career with Westchester County GIS, I begin a similar Blue Highways journey albeit of a virtual one across the State of New York.   Destinations where I, and many of you, share a common bond:  GIS.   But these places are different.  Places and cities not necessarily built along the New York State Thruway, the Long Island Expressway, or the Hudson River.  Instead, they are one gas station towns, small villages and schools, or cyber cafes off the beaten track.   Maybe an isolated office in a tiny village along the Southern Tier, the Adirondacks, or the western edges of the state.  A remote zip code.  Or maybe a small business in a midtown Manhattan high rise.

And you may not see the people behind these small GIS efforts at the state conferences, the GeoSpatial Summit, or participating on the statewide listservs.    Nonetheless these are individuals doing the same work you and I do all the time but with little fanfare. A single copy ArcView, AutoCAD, MapInfo, Google Earth, or some Open Source software.   No enterprise GIS spoken here.   Schools, villages, small business, nonprofits, community groups, volunteers, and everything else.  Small places.  Small budgets.  Off the grid and making a difference.   And the beat goes on.

This is the inaugural post in The Blue Highways of GIS which will occur occasionally along other opinions and stories in the eSpatiallyNewYork blog.  If you have similar places or programs you would like to share and appear in The Blue Highways of GIS, please feel free to contact me.

Waterloo, New York

Located in Seneca County with a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau estimated population of 5,171, the Village of Waterloo began developing GIS capacity in the 2009-2010 time period (following a Needs Assessment completed earlier) as part of an effort to automate and map the Waterloo water supply system (the Village is a water producer and supplier of water to surrounding towns as well).  Like many other similar sized local governments during this time period, funding to initiate the project was obtained through the New York State Archives  LGRMIF grant program.

With no prior exposure to GIS and about a day’s worth of ArcView desktop training by staff from the MRB Group (which currently serves as the village’s engineer),  Jared Bromka, NYS Water Treatment Operator, began scanning and georeferencing hardcopy valve “tie cards” to map the location of the water valves.  Using the scanned images, Jared then spent the next couple years in the field with a sub-foot accuracy Trimble GPS unit to field locate/verify all the valves, fire hydrants, and other water system related features.  From this data development effort he was then able to create a complete system-wide coverage.    Ultimately, MRB Group then used this data to create a hydraulic water system model in GIS (InfoWater extension for ArcGIS Desktop) for engineering purposes.

Village of Waterloo Water Distribution System

Village of Waterloo Water Distribution System

Jared maintains the water system, catch basin, and sanitary sewer system data (which MRB also assisted in mapping) on a village Dell Precision laptop which contains the village’s single license of ArcView.  Waterloo also has the ArcReader extension which allows him to distribute ArcReader projects to other workstations in the village.  Jared also makes maps for many of the various programs and events within the village including the police department, as well as various parade routes, 5K run routes, vendor location map for the Memorial Day committee, a shuttle bus drop-off locations map, county water distribution maps, zoning maps, and a bike trail map. He says that the street department references his GIS maps and the water department, understandably so, continues to use the maps heavily for various planning and expansion projects including hydrant and valve labeling and locating efforts.   (Several of his maps can be seen on the village website.)  Visitors to the village website are also encouraged to take a look at the village interactive map. Today, using both the desktop GIS software and the GPS equipment, Jared maintains all of the village GIS datasets while still serving as a Water Treatment Operator.

Jared has never attended any formal GIS training and notes that beyond the introductory training he received from MRB Group, he has also learned how to use Google Earth and that the amount of time he spends doing GIS work varies greatly, sometimes a few months between map use and creation, to other times when he is involved in three projects at once.  While attending statewide conferences and events is difficult, he has attended local events and meetings hosted by GIS-SIG.

Jared exemplifies many civil servants working in small governments across the state engaged in geospatial work and support – though it is not their primary job responsibility.   The many locations and programs with limited in-house or consultant resources, and little if any dedicated funding for geospatial development other than what comes through associated with regulatory programs, or increasingly, via public works and engineering mapping programs.  Many of us will probably never meet Jared but we can certainly appreciate what he has accomplished and will continue to contribute to the Village of Waterloo.

At the end of the day and all said, just one person in a small place making a big difference.  Jared Bromka and the many others along the Blue Highways of GIS.

Thanks for reading and see you down the road.