Author Archives: sam.weargis@gmail.com

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.

Relative vs. Absolute Accuracy Revisited

Posted on by
Reply

I recently attended a presentation by Dr. Wende Mix, Associate Professor, Geography and Planning Department at SUNY Buffalo State entitled “Field Data Collection Using Smart Phones, Tablets, and GPS Devices:  A Case Study.  Though the presentation focused on using mobile devices for field data collection, augmented with high resolution aerial imagery,   Dr. Mix inadvertently helped revisit a debate on the long standing geospatial issue of relative accuracy vs. absolute accuracy. While relative mapping accuracy issues are certainly pertinent as part of the emerging Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) and crowd sourcing data collection movements, Dr. Mix’s presentation highlights street feature data collection which was once the mapping domain reserved only for surveying and engineering disciplines.

So how do mobile devices intersect with spatial accuracy?  If at all?   Tons of geospatial data being collected with mobile devices (particularly by the growing Smart Phone market), data of varying scales and accuracies by personnel with varying degrees of training and expertise.  But at the end of the day, with all the disparate data combined, the data mash-up stills supports most decision making needs.  Quite a difference from the efforts of New York State Association of Professional Land Surveyors (NYSAPLS) which for years lobbied that similar street feature mapping across the state could legally only be done by licensed surveyors.  So does spatial data accuracy matter anymore?

Of course it does, though an easier answer is that data is normally collected of sufficient accuracy to support specific business needs.    But perhaps the best way to illustrate how this new market of mobile devices plays into the relative accuracy vs. absolute accuracy discussion, one first needs to consider the body of geospatial data development since the late 1970s/early 1980s.

Early Data Development:  With many early government GIS programs getting started with public domain U.S. Geological Survey  1:100000 (+/- 166’)  Digital Line Graph (DLG) or 1:24000 (+/- 40’)  digital files, widespread use of the technology, particularly within the engineering communities and urban environments, was slow to take hold because the data was considered too generalized and “not accurate” enough. Beyond the human resources needed to manually digitize and convert hardcopy manuscripts, much of the first generation of geospatial data was cheap to acquire and develop.  The trade-off was that the geospatial data was of limited accuracy and content due largely to the generalized nature of the source documentation.

However, as data accuracy improved through photogrammetric projects creating many urban and metropolitan land bases at larger and more accurate scales (1”=200’  & 1”=100’), including a wide range of planimetric datasets such as building footprints, edge of pavement, hydrology, bridges and even stone walls – so did the associated data development costs.   However, the increased accuracy and completeness of the data resulted in a much broader acceptance and use within the engineering community.   And certainly some of this increased user acceptance was also a result of the growing inner-operability between GIS and AutoCAD software packages.  Improved  GPS technology (as well as with “Selective Availability” being discontinued in 2000) also gave government and industry additional tools to further push the limits of high accuracy feature mapping, though as a whole, industry mapping costs remained high.  And cadastral programs continued to mature making large scale digital tax map datasets available providing even more reference and content to both hardcopy and online mapping efforts.  Overall, particularly in the urban environment, higher accuracy datasets with features being mapped a higher degree of positional accuracy,  were slowly replacing the more generalized first generation land bases.

Referencing Data Collected in the Field:   With many urban and even rural land bases now created and available online as a service and augmented by a variety of high resolution aerial imagery services, a large portion of data collected by mobile devices can now be easily referenced and spatially edited to its right relative location. (And as an added benefit, normally at a lower data development cost.)  Most mobile devices now include cameras, so including a picture of the selected feature adds even greater context to its relative location.  Using desktop tools, fire hydrants can be moved to their right relative X,Y location in front of the proper house.  Catch basins can be spatially adjusted to register in their right relative locations on street corners, street signs in their right relative location in the right-of-way, or the locations of underground storage tanks or septic fields moved to their right relative location on the proper tax parcel.  Overall, an industry witnessing an increased body of geospatial data that is not absolute accurate, but relatively accurate and ultimately more useful to a larger community of users – including the public works and engineering disciplines.   (It is noted that some workflows and business models may limit or not include resources for the editing of data; thus requiring high accuracy data capture in the field).

Dr. Mix’s presentation unintentionally illustrated how far we’ve come in context of building and using relative accurate geospatial datasets.  The content of her presentation was both typical and timely as much of the work across the state with mobile devices is being used with public infrastructure and street feature mapping.  While non-survey grade GPS units initially introduced some of these very same issues, the new mobile devices, and in particular Smart Phones, are game changers in context of affordability and ease-of-use.   It is to be seen long term how Smart Phone data collection will impact the low-end GPS hardware market.  (Any Google search on “GPS vs. Smart Phone Data Collection” will provide a long list of opinions on the matter.)

There is no question absolute (or near) accuracy – and its high price tag in data acquisition – is still mandatory for engineering and design/build projects.  But for nearly all other business needs, relative accurate and complete datasets will continue to augment design/build projects and support government and industry decision making.    All said “everything happens somewhere – and it is increasingly being mapped in its right relative location”.