December 2007 ALS News • 1 · Tim Harding, ALS 9 Editor’s Notes Brian Munday, Executive Director 13 Letters 18 Association Notes New Members Members on the …

www.alsa.ab.caDecember 2007 ALS News • 1

2 • ALS News www.alsa.ab.ca December 2007


PresidentR.M. (Bob) Wallace

Past PresidentD.H. (Dirk) VandenBrink

Vice PresidentR.O. (Ron) Hall

Secretary TreasurerD.R. (Dave) McWilliam

RegistrarR.A. (Dick) Bassil

Executive DirectorB.E. (Brian) Munday

Acting Director of Practice ReviewD.R. (Don) George

CouncillorsB.A. (Bruce) BeairstoB.W. (Bruce) GudimT.J. (Tim) HardingT.W. (Terry) HudemaR. (Rob) RadovanovicB.D. (Brian) Ross

Public MembersD.R. (Russell) Barnes (Council)

ON THE COVER

5 President’s MessageBob Wallace, ALS

7 Councillor’s ForumTim Harding, ALS

9 Editor’s NotesBrian Munday,Executive Director

13 Letters

18 Association NotesNew MembersMembers on the MoveNew ALSA StaffQuestion TimeMulti Media Land Records Progress Report

21 Implications of theDelkamuukw DecisionRebecca Broten, Michael Barry,Oliver W. MacLaren - U of C

29 SPR MessageFred Cheng, ALS- Official Settlement Surveys—

Surveys of Public Land WithinUnsurveyed Territory WithinAlberta

31 SPR CornerFred Cheng, ALS- Case Study No. 34:

Survey Control—A Tale ofTwo Bearings

35 GuardpostJeff Boutilier, ALS

37 PDC CornerMarty Robinson, ALS

39 Public RelationsBruce Drake, ALS

42 Book ReviewThe Curious Life of RobertHooke—The Man WhoMeasured LondonKen Allred, ALS

43 Safety SenseAlex Hittel, ALS- Walking Through the Workers

Compensation Board

47 ASSMT NotesRob Cream, CSTASSMT Vice President

49 A Moment of Silence- Waker E. (Skinney) Bright- Jules Francois Brassard- Hal Falkenberg

52 HistoryBrian MundayExecutive Director- 1936-1939—An All-Time Low

Editor Advertising and ProductionBrian E. Munday: [email protected] Sharon D. Armstrong: [email protected]

Deadline dates for submission of material to ensure printing are as follows: February 15th,June 1st, September 1st, and November 15th. Opinions expressed by the editor or individualwriters are not necessarily endorsed by the Council of the Alberta Land Surveyors' Association.Original articles may be reprinted with due credit given to the source and with permission ofindividual writers or where no writer is indicated, with the permission of the Editor. ALSNews is published by the Alberta Land Surveyors' Association for circulation to the AssociationMembership. Address all correspondence to:

Alberta Land Surveyors' AssociationSuite 1000, 10020 – 101A Avenue — Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3G2

Tel: 780-429-8805 or 1-800-665-2572Fax: 780-429-3374 [email protected] www.alsa.ab.ca

CANADA POST PUBLICATION #40051474

TABLE OF CONTENTStable of contentsALALALALALSSSSS newsnewsnewsnewsnewsDECEMBER 2007 VOL. 36-4

Cover design by Rose CountryAdvertising & Public Relations



president’s messageby Bob Wallace, ALS

What is our Legacy?

In Alberta we are planting pins inthe ground (defining boundaries) atan unprecedented rate. The bigquestion is, how many of theseremain over time?

Landowners rely on these pins toconstruct improvements, includinghouses, garages, fences and otherlandscaping features. The surveypins let them know the limits of theland they own. Those associatedwith development are also con-cerned with boundary locations toensure that what is being con-structed is done so in the properlocation. Those involved in theenergy industry realize the safetyissues created if a pipeline is notput within the right-of-way bounda-ries.

As land in Alberta becomes moreexpensive, boundaries become morecrucial, together with our job assurveyors, to define these locations.

I believe we have a large problemwith the preservation of survey pinsin all sectors of the province, butprimarily in the urban areas. In theenergy industry, boundaries areusually well staked and machineoperators understand what asurvey pin is and its importance tothe task they are performing.

This is not the case in the townsand cities. The only group of peoplethat understands the importance ofsurvey pins is the surveyors them-selves. Part of the blame is thesystem and the remainder is a lackof understanding of the importanceof a survey pin. In Alberta, there isalso very little consequence for theremoval of a survey pin.

Our system of only posting asubdivision once prior to the regis-tration of a survey plan, in manycases, leaves a very small percent-age of survey pins remaining. Thosethat are left are damaged andunreliable. In some subdivisions,there are no pins remaining what-soever. This is typically barelandcondominiums where considerable

paving, concrete poured and land-scaping is completed after the planhas been posted.

In delayed posting plans, pinsare often planted prior to landscap-ing being completed and the sameproblem exists with pins beingremoved and damaged, but perhapsnot to the same extent.

In Ontario, subdivisions havedevelopment agreements requiringthe developer to post a bond that isused to repost the subdivision afterconstruction is complete. The resultis a complete survey fabric that canbe used for future boundary deter-mination. Would this work inAlberta? Perhaps this may work, aswell as other options—one being acoordinate based cadastre.

In many older areas, the disap-pearing survey fabric is makingboundary re-establishment muchmore difficult and uncertain. Thepublic demands one boundary, notuncertain opinions from two ormore surveyors who are trying topiece together a complicated jigsawpuzzle with missing pieces.

The largest obstacle, as I see it, isthe lack of understanding of theimportance of survey markers byeveryone. The ALSA has done agreat job of heightening the aware-ness of its members. Maybe it istime to change course and educatepeople on boundaries and theimportance of survey markers.Developers and municipalities mustmake an effort to preserve surveypins and implement penalties forthose who damage or remove pins.The ALSA must develop a system toallow for the simple re-establish-ment of a removed or damaged pin.

The City of Winnipeg is proactivein preserving survey pins andenforces penalties to those who

damage or remove pins. NewBrunswick has a similar system.

Our municipalities are unawareof this issue and remain a largecontributor to the problem withinfrastructure construction whichremoves survey pins in large num-bers.

In Calgary, 16th Avenue has beenwidened, destroying old surveyevidence which dates back 100years. No effort was made to refer-ence and witness this evidence,even after requests by concernedsurveyors. It wasn’t in the budget.

The ALSA continues to dialoguewith the municipal and provincialgovernments on an ongoing basis.This topic must be raised andsolutions found and implemented.

Is this an ALSA problem? Partly,because we are the keepers of thesurvey fabric. It is also the problemof whoever destroys or disturbsmonuments. It is also the responsi-bility of our provincial governmentwho charges fees for the registra-tion of titles and the creation of newland parcels. Part of the integrity ofthe Torrens System is its structurein the ground. The title insurancecompanies would have us ignorethese issues, build where we wantand sweep it under the rug underthe guise of a title insurance policy.

As surveyors, being on the frontlines, you must be proactive in thearea you work to ensure that thesurvey fabric is preserved and yourlocal government, developers andconstruction companies are awareof survey markers and that theyleave them alone. In a circumstancewhere that is impossible, theremust be a provision to restore thedamaged monument.

That would be our legacy!

In many older areas, the disappearing survey fabric ismaking boundary re-establishment much more difficultand uncertain.



councillor’s forumby Tim Harding, ALS

The Alberta economy hasslowed, is making a correction,going through a slight adjustmentor whatever you want to call it. Thehigh Canadian dollar, the energyroyalties and possibly the high costof labour in Alberta have all con-tributed to this slowdown. Thesurvey industry has not seen aslowdown in many years. Themembership in the Association isgrowing. Surveyors, party chiefsand draftsman are being hired fromaround the country to support ourAlberta industry. Some companieshave created alliances with compa-nies in other countries to outsourcedrafting and engineering services.This infrastructure that has beenput in place was keeping up withthe demand from industry forsurvey services. We are able to offerhigh-paying stable jobs in ourindustry and it is attracting manypeople to it.

In 1982, the survey industry wasbooming. Surveyors, party chiefs,

draftsmen and other people werearriving from various parts ofCanada to support the surveyindustry in Alberta. The Trudeaugovernment implemented the nowinfamous National Energy Policy.Without explanation, it is safe tosay that it shut down the oil indus-try in Alberta. What happened overtime was that the labour force thatsupported the oil industry—andthat included surveyors—dwindledto match the demand which was afraction of what it is today. Therewas a lack of interest by the youngto enter the workforce in thegeomatics industry.

In the late 1990s, when the oilindustry had a resurgence, Albertaended up with a workforce that waspre-1982 trained or newly-trainedin the late 90s. What this createdwas a gap in the age of skilledlabour. This is why we still seethose 70-year-old inspectors onplant sites. I am not in anywaysaying that a slowdown of the

magnitude of 1982 would everhappen again. The world needsAlberta’s oil. This slowdown did getme thinking though, that weworked very hard as a profession toexpand our membership and thinkof innovative ways to get projectscompleted by immigrating a workforce to Canada or outsourcingdrafting to other countries.

As I stated above, we are, as aprofession, attracting a geomaticsworkforce to Alberta. High pay, jobsecurity and lots of work are thereasons. A challenge for us might beto come up with a way to maintain aqualified workforce during aslowdown. In the long term, oureconomy will remain strong. Duringa slowdown, how do we keep inter-est among the youth in the schoolsystems, universities and collegesfor geomatics if the job market ingeomatics does not remain aspromising as it is today?



editor’s notesby Brian Munday, Executive Director

Every morning when Tarabrings me the mail, there arealways the usual invoices fromorganizations and people that wantto get paid. Once I get past the bills,there are always a number ofmagazines for me to read andcirculate throughout the office.Sometimes there are magazinesfrom other provincial survey asso-ciations. Sometimes there aremagazines from state surveyingsocieties. We get magazines aboutthe oil and construction industriesin Alberta. We get legal periodicals.We get business journals.

We also get some of the maga-zines from other self-governingprofessions here in Alberta. Re-cently, the magazine of the AlbertaVeterinary Medical Associationcame across my desk and theyreprinted an article from the Col-lege of Dietitians of Alberta. Thearticle was entitled, “The Top TenCauses of Unprofessional Conduct”and was published by James T.Casey from the Field Law Office intheir magazine, Perspectives for theProfessions.

I didn’t want to reprint Mr.Casey’s article, although it is verygood. I decided, however, to preparea land surveyor specific article thatwould list the top ten reasons fordisciplinary action against AlbertaLand Surveyors.

A short time ago, I had theopportunity to call a practitionerabout a boundary matter that wasraised by a landowner. When thepractitioner answered the phoneand realized that it was me calling,he said something to the effect of,“it can’t be a good day when you geta phone call from the ExecutiveDirector.” Well, I don’t alwaysphone practitioners with problemsor bad news but if you want to avoidthose problem phone calls from me,here are ten things that you mightwant to keep in mind.

1. Communication With OtherAlberta Land Surveyors

As a senior Alberta Land Surveyor,you may be reluctant to call one ofthe newer members of the Associa-tion because you don’t know themvery well. At the same time, rela-tively junior Alberta Land Survey-ors may be reluctant to call seniormembers of this Association be-cause they feel intimidated by theexperience and knowledge they mayhave. Result? Neither Alberta LandSurveyor calls the other and prob-lems or concerns go unresolved.Talk to one another. Do it now.Don’t wait.

There is a tendency (and I willadmit I’m sometimes as guilty of itas anyone else) to send a letter oran e-mail instead of talking to theother practitioner. It may be impor-tant at some time to document yourconversations and your findings forthe record. However, there isusually nothing better than pickingup the phone and talking to theother Alberta Land Surveyor di-rectly. You can have a dynamicconversation and start to under-stand the other practitioner’sperspective and approach to asurveying matter. When you firstput something in writing withoutspeaking to the practitioner first, itis like drawing a line in the sandand making a serious accusation.The tendency for the other practi-tioner is to get defensive and justifywhat he has done instead of work-ing towards a resolution. When youspeak directly to one another, thereis a natural reaction to be lessconfrontational and more willing toseek a resolution.

2. Communicate WithYour Clients

When I do get phone calls fromlandowners, it is often because theyhave tried to communicate with apractitioner but the practitioner hasnot responded or responded to theclient’s satisfaction. I’ve seen anumber of cases over the yearswhere spending a little bit moretime with the client up front wouldhave saved tremendous amounts oftime at the end of the project. Some-times, things are not easy to resolveand no one can pretend that theyare. However, direct communicationwith the client can usually resolvethe vast majority of client concernsand problems.

One of the trickiest things aboutcommunicating with clients is to tryto explain complex technical or legalmatters in a way that they canunderstand them. Why does theManual of Standard Practice allowfor a tolerance of 0.2 metres forfences on real property reports?Why does an Alberta Land Sur-veyor have to look for evidence atmy lot corner when my lot is not theone being surveyed?

3. Communication With StaffThese days, the Alberta LandSurveyor is typically in the officeand not in the field. It is not alwaysthe case, but we know that AlbertaLand Surveyors are relying moreand more on their technicians andtechnologists to be their eyes andears in the field. Survey companiesestablish policies and procedures todeal with any number of situationsthat might be encountered in the

...“it can’t be a good day when you get a phone call fromthe Executive Director.” Well, I don’t always phonepractitioners with problems or bad news...


field. A common policy would be fora party chief to knock on the door ofa landowner and let them knowthey need access to the property inorder to conduct a particular type ofsurvey. If the landowner is nothome, leave a door knocker card tolet them know that a survey crewwas on the property. It is a reason-able policy and one that we hopethat all practitioners would adhereto.

The challenge, of course, isenforcement. The policy is in placebut how does anyone really knowthat the field crews are followingthe policy. A survey company canhave regular meetings with its fieldstaff and conduct periodic fieldinspections.

It is important for Alberta LandSurveyors to know that, when alandowner speaks to a party chief orany member of a field crew, theywill likely assume that the partychief is the Alberta Land Surveyor.If the field crew member has a badattitude or a bad day, then theAlberta Land Surveyor might notknow about it until he or she gets aphone call from the landowner orme about the complaint.

...despite best efforts, theprofessional life sufferswhen the personal lifesuffers.

4. Personal IssuesAll of us have, or at least shouldhave, a life outside of our work andour profession. Sometimes thatpersonal life gets in the way of ourprofessional life as much as we tryto separate the two. Divorce, drugsand alcohol are common types ofpersonal problems. Often, we willtry to put our personal demonsbehind us and put our energies intoour work. However, we have seensituations where, despite bestefforts, the professional life sufferswhen the personal life suffers.

It will take somebody withgreater skill and expertise than meto suggest how to deal with thesepersonal issues. It is important,though, to recognize when they arehappening and get the help that’s

needed so that both the professionaland personal life do not suffertogether.

5. ContractsMuch has been said about the needfor contracts in the land surveyingbusiness for many years. TheAlberta Land Surveyors’ Associa-tion has put on seminars aboutcontracts and the Canadian Councilof Land Surveyors put together abooklet on contracts and it is stillavailable on the CCLS website.

There is nothing more frustrat-ing for me than a phone call from aclient telling me that they asked anAlberta Land Surveyor to do onething but received something else.When I speak to the Alberta LandSurveyor, they thought they knewwhat the landowner wanted or hadexpected. There is no writtencontract because it was felt that itwas just a routine, straightforwardjob. In these types of cases, it isoften the land surveyor who shouldhave known better who will end upbearing the brunt of the pain whenthere is a lack of a contract.

6. Current KnowledgeMany Alberta Land Surveyorsattend regional meetings but somedon’t. Many Alberta Land Survey-ors attend annual general meetingsbut some don’t. Many Alberta LandSurveyors read this magazine andother survey magazines but somedon’t. There are many opportunitiesfor practitioners to stay currentwith the latest technological andprofessional developments. Ofcourse, it can be difficult to do whenthere are so many other pressingmatters. For me, I have to make apoint of allocating time to learn newthings and attend seminars. Notstaying current and relying on theway things have always been doneis a sure way to invite a meetingwith the Discipline Committee. Isyour binder of acts and regulationsup-to-date?

7. DollarsThe discipline process is not a goodway to resolve disputes over fees forservice. I would prefer that feedisputes get resolved as a civilmatter but that doesn’t mean that a

client won’t file a complaint againsta practitioner over a fee dispute.The Alberta Land Surveyor quotesa price for a job and the client givesthe go-ahead to proceed. The Al-berta Land Surveyor does the joband then invoices the client and theinvoice ends up being much higherthan the quoted price. Did theAlberta Land Surveyor explainwhat disbursements or registrationfees might be involved? Did theclient change the scope of the workbut expected the price to remain thesame? Did the field crew arrive onsite and realize there was no evi-dence for miles around and the jobwas going to take twice as long asoriginally planned? An AlbertaLand Surveyor should receive fairand just compensation from hisclient but there is also a responsibil-ity to ensure that clients are awareof anything that may affect thequoted price. This will minimize,but not eliminate the possibility ofthe Alberta Land Surveyor spend-ing time dealing with fee disputes.

8. Inadequate RecordsAlberta Land Surveyors keep lots ofrecords. It is in the surveyor’snature to do that. However, therehave been situations where old filescould have been lost. Perhaps it wasbecause a survey company wasbought out or perhaps there werejust so many records that the one inquestion could not be located. Itmakes it tough to defend youractions when you don’t have thecontemporary documentary evi-dence to back it up.

Similarly, your field notes mayhave made sense at the time butwhen you look at the file severalyears later, do they still makesense? I cannot recall a disciplinecase solely based on a practitioner’sfield notes but I do know that goodfield notes have gone a long way tohelp a practitioner defend himself.

9. Supervision, Directionand Control

“Supervision, direction and control”is a phrase that appears more thanonce in the Act and regulations. Wehave seen cases over the yearswhere an Alberta Land Surveyor


has delegated a great deal of re-sponsibility to a non-professional.The non-professional may be anexperienced capable person or maybe a raw recruit. As an AlbertaLand Surveyor, you are responsiblefor supervising all staff. You areresponsible for directing the workand how it is to be done. You areresponsible for controlling thepractice overall.

You cannot run any organizationwithout delegating a number ofresponsibilities and trusting yourstaff. However, at the end of theday, you must take responsiblity forthe overall practice and ensure thatthe products and services you

provide are consistent with the highstandards of the profession and theexpectations of your company.

10.Unauthorized PracticeSometimes a practitioner will hirestaff but not exercise the adequatesupervision, direction and control.In some cases, a practitioner willget involved with a non-professionalwho will offer to do marketing forthe land surveyor and do the fieldwork for the land surveyor. All theland surveyor has to do is sign theplan. In these cases, the Associationasks itself, who does the clientthinks the land surveyor is? Inmany cases, this type of situation

goes to the heart of what it meansto be an Alberta Land Surveyor.Quite often, in these situations, it isthe Alberta Land Surveyor whoappears before the DisciplineCommittee and must answer to hispeers.

It is no coincidence that the firstthree items on my top ten list dealwith communication. In fact, sixother items on the list are alsorelated to communication. Only oneitem, current knowledge, really hasanything to do with the technicalcompetence of the Alberta LandSurveyor. If you are ever to findyourself before a Discipline Com-mittee or responding to a formalcomplaint, it is likely that it willhave very little to do with yourtechnical skills and ability but willbe centred around how well youhave communicated as a profes-sional.

...at the end of the day, you must take responsiblity forthe overall practice and ensure that the products andservices you provide are consistent with the highstandards of the profession...



letters

I’m back!!Just a follow up of my article in theMarch 2007 issue of ALS News.

First of all, I would like to thankDavid Marquardt for nominatingme to receive the prestigious Pro-fessional Recognition Award and forCouncil approving the nomination.Unfortunately, I was not availableto attend the last AGM to receivethis honour due to a last minutefamily tragedy. I am truly humbledby the words that David presentedto those in attendance. I very muchhave enjoyed my 32 years of mem-bership within the Association andespecially the last (almost 14) yearsas being the Assistant to the Direc-tor of Practice Review. As most ofyou know, this year, I signed a one-year contract with the Associationand the first part consisted of a six-month leave of absence.

Now, what did I do for the sixmonths that I took off? The firstmonth Eileen and I readied our oldmotorhome for the trip of ourlifetime. During that time we alsovisited all of our children, grand-children and other members of ourfamily before heading out. Then onJune 6th, we headed out East forthree-and-a-half months to seemany extraordinary people, places,natural and man-made wonders. Ittruly was a trip of a lifetime and thegood Lord took care of us all theway. We were able to visit all tenprovinces in Canada (visited mydaughter and her family in BCbefore leaving). We put on over18,000 kms on the motorhome andtook (kept) about 4,000 pictures.

The last month and a half, weunpacked, winterized our motor-home, visited with family andfriends, caught up with the goingson while we were away and pre-pared for the routine ahead. I amback in the office (started October29th) and now look forward togetting on with the job and hearingfrom my friends and acquaintancesin the survey world.

I would really recommend thateach and every one of you considernot put off taking time to do whatyou want to do. It is not importantwhether it is spending more timewith the family, seeing more of ourgreat country or something elsethat is important to you, but justtake the time. Remember we don’tknow how long we are going to liveand what condition we will be in inthe near future.

DON GEORGE, ALS

Public Member ToCouncil AppointmentMr. D. Russell Barnes:

I am pleased to advise you ofyour appointment as the publicmember to the Council of theAlberta Land Surveyors’ Associa-tion.

The Land Surveyors Act estab-lishes the ALSA as the regulatorybody responsible for the regulation,registration and discipline of landsurveyors in this province. Theterm of your appointment is for oneyear and you are eligible to servefor five further terms of appoint-ment of one year each. Should youfind it necessary, you are free towithdraw at any time.

Public members play an impor-tant role in serving the broad publicinterest. Since you are not a mem-ber of the Association, you bring anobjective viewpoint to the table andensure the interests of Albertansare represented at professionalmeetings and hearings.

I appreciate you agreeing toserve the public in this capacity andfor your past service as publicmember on the Practice ReviewBoard of the ALSA. Thank you verymuch for your willingness to serveyour province.

IRIS EVANS, MINISTERALBERTA EMPLOYMENT, IMMIGRATION

AND INDUSTRY

Science AlbertaFoundation UpdateFor more than 17 years, ScienceAlberta Foundation has created anddelivered innovative programs thatpromote science literacy in Alberta.We stand alone in taking sciencewhere it’s needed most—to families,teachers, librarians and localorganizations; within homes, class-rooms and learning facilities; fromthe largest cities to the smallesttowns in every corner of Canada’sfastest growing province. We wouldlike to thank you for your help inmaking this possible. We appreciatethe support we have received fromthe Alberta Land Surveyors’ Asso-ciation. We are delighted to providean annual update on the success ofthe “Made to Measure” Science-In-ACrate.

Awesome crate. Thestudents really enjoyed thesurvey one. For some of myhands-on or more activestudents, it really helpedmake the concepts moreclear. Thanks.

G.S. LAKIE, MIDDLE SCHOOL, LETHBRIDGE

Developed with support from theAlberta Land Surveyors’ Associa-tion, “Made to Measure” Science-In-A Crate is directly linked to Alber-ta’s grade eight math curriculum(Shape and Space). Each crateincludes seven activities that helpstudents explore the math curricu-lum through real-life scenariosfaced by land surveyors. As theywork through the activities, stu-dents create and analyze a digitalnetwork, build a 3-D model of apotential oil well site, and estimatethe composite area of a property.


Students even create a treasuremap to determine the location of alost gold mine!

The activities have been designedto help students develop under-standing in difficult concepts rang-ing from measurement, transforma-tions, and 2-D shapes and 3-Dobjects. As they work in groups,students enhance their communica-tion and problem-solving skillswhich are necessary as they roleplay land surveyors and resolve thescenarios posed in the activities.

Between July 1, 2006 and June30, 2007, the 12 copies of this cratetravelled to 52 classrooms/commu-nity groups in 21 venues in 14communities with 1,152 partici-pants! We are pleased to see theincreased use over the prior year—from 18 venues in 13 communitiesand 710 users.

To increase awareness of “Madeto Measure,” we produced promo-tional mailers featuring our mathcrates and distributed them toteachers at 1,352 junior high/middleschool/high schools across theprovince. These were distributed atthe end of August 2007 in order toreach teachers at the start of theschool year when they are develop-ing their lesson plans and sched-ules. We are pleased to report thatthere are already 17 bookings for“Made to Measure” crates for thecurrent school year.

We appreciate the contributionyou have made to the “Made toMeasure” crate and we value ourrelationship with the Alberta LandSurveyors’ Association. We lookforward to continuing to worktogether to increase the scienceliteracy and awareness acrossAlberta.

TAMARA L. MCCARRON, BSC, MBADIRECTOR, DEVELOPMENT AND

COMMUNICATIONS

Springbank BaselineFollowing Fred Cheng’s article onthe EDM calibration baselines inAlberta, I have used the Springbankbaseline for EDM calibration and adeformation analysis exercise in theundergraduate high precisionsurvey course at the University ofCalgary every year since 2004. Wehave limited our observations topillars 2-6 due to time considera-

tions as we have had to completethe observations within an after-noon. However, we have acquired atleast one set of data per year overfour years using a Leica TC2003total station which has a precisionestimate for the EDM of 1mm ±1ppm.

On a baseline where the absolutedistances between pillars aresuspect (i.e. there is a hypothesisthat the Springbank baselinedeforms—the pillars move due tofrost heaving), one should solve forthe zero error (sometimes calledprism constant) independently ofthe scale factor. Zero error is notdependent on distance if one solvesfor it on a baseline where the pillarsare in a straight line. (On Spring-bank, we have ignored the offlinepillar.) One then solves for the scalefactor once one has corrected forzero error using an iterative process(i.e. if one or more pillars arethought to have moved, one re-moves the observations to and fromthose pillars from the solution ofthe scale factor). Once the scalefactor is known, one then appliesthe scale factor to the measure-ments to generate new distances tothe pillars which are supposed tohave moved. One may have toremove several different combina-tions of pillars from the scale factorsolution in a number of differentiterations before there is conclusivesupport for a claim that a particularpillar has deformed.

Our primary purpose of theexercise has been to educate thestudents. Thus, they have been leftto make mistakes and explain them,and so our observations have notbeen perfect. What has been appar-ent, though, is that the readingsfrom our meteorological instru-ments (barometers, thermometers,psychrometers) have not appearedto be as precise as expected basedon comparisons with the Spring-bank weather station’s valuespublished online and the behaviourof the EDM measurements undersupposedly changing conditions too,and thus we have not been able toconclude with any level of convic-tion that there has been deforma-tion in the Springbank baseline.

This year, prior to doing meas-urements on the baseline, we

calibrated our field meteorologicalinstruments against a ParoscientificMet3A weather station which haspublished precision estimates forthe conditions under which weexpected to work given as follows:pressure ±0.08 hPa, temperature±0.1 oC, relative humidity ±2 %.Again allowing for observer error,and only some 20 observations perinstrument were deemed to beuseful, we found that for our mostprecise field instruments the preci-sion estimates were of the followingorder: temperature ±3oC, pressure±5 hPa, relative humidity > ±10%.Of interest was that our two lowcost electronic hygrometers werefound to be so inaccurate so as to beconsidered unsuitable and so wereverted to using the traditionalwet and dry bulb psychrometers.

Using simulation by insertingdifferent values for temperature,pressure and humidity into themeteorological correction equationfor the Leica TC2003, these figurestranslate into an estimated impreci-sion of the order of ±3 ppm (3 mm/km. (The TC2003 met. equationdoes not lend itself to error propa-gation as the units are incompat-ible.) Thus, the overall scale factordue to the precision of the EDMinstrument itself and the precisionof the meteorological instrumentscan be estimated as the square rootof 12+32 which amounts to ±3.2ppm. One doubles that value tohave 95% confidence interval. Thisis too large to make a conclusivededuction that any of the pillarshave moved or not between any twoparticular years or since the lastofficial baseline distances werepublished in December 2003.

DR. MICHAEL BARRYASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, ASSOCIATE HEAD

UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES

Thank YouOn behalf of the Geomatics Engi-neering Student Society, I wouldlike to thank you for the sponsor-ship provided by the ALSA for froshweek T-shirts.

Frosh week is a week-long,engineering-wide event aimedmainly at first-year students. Theweek has many different types ofevents, all of which seek to intro-duce the first years to their new


home for the next four or five years.The goal is to help the new studentsfeel welcome and introduce them toEngineering. As such, frosh week isan excellent opportunity to promotegeomatics to students who maynever have heard of it. The hope isthat some of these students may goon to pick geomatics as their engi-neering major.

With your kind sponsorship, theGeomatics Engineering studentssported T-shirts with the ALSA’slogo and name on the back. Theseshirts continue to be popular longafter frosh week, and as a result,the ALSA’s logo is seen by manyengineering students. We hope thelogos have brought recognition tothe Association.

Again, we appreciate your spon-sorship for the Engineering Week’sGeomatics T-shirts!

CORAL BLISS TAYLOR, PRESIDENTGEOMATICS ENGINEERING STUDENT SOCIETY

A Surveyor’s PrayerWhen my surveying days aredone, I pray that my bootsshow the wear and tear ofthe many miles I havetraveled…yet my footstepsshow how softly I have trod.

While I was in Haiti this pastsummer, one of the many inspira-tional moments I got occurred onthe site where we were working.Local labourers were collecting theabundant surface rocks into numer-ous piles to use for the propertywall and building walls for theorphanage we were surveying anddesigning. I took off my muddyboots and got one of those shotsthat make you smile. The wordscame to me a few minutes later.

The message is pretty simple...assurveyors’ priorities go, a comfort-able pair of protective boots is highon the priority list...they will getyou through the thousands of mileswe walk through muck, gravel,jungle, mountains, dust and dirt.While in the process of doing so,like our predecessors, we gather agreat respect of God’s creation...thisland we walk across.

DAVID N. MARQUARDT, ALS

BridgelandI thought you might be interested inseeing these images I took over thesummer. My wife and I were hikingnear Saskatchewan River Crossingin Banff National Park, and wefound this tree.

As you can see, it has been carveand inscribed with Bridgeland’sname and the (assumed) names ofhis party. I’m not sure if this carv-ing represents a survey monument(i.e. bearing tree) or is simply apostcard announcing ‘we were here.’I haven’t found anything yet at theCLSR in my attempts to find outjust what he might have been doingin that area.

ALLAN MAIN, ALS

Thanks very much for your note.Paul Langevin, Jeanine Rhemtullaand I photographed the tree in 1998when we were completing a resur-vey of M.P. Bridgland’s 1915phototopographic survey of north-

central Jasper. It was as much as adiversion as anything else that tookus to the tree.

Since that time, thanks much tothe efforts of UofA literary histo-rian, Ian MacLaren (author ofMapper of Mountains) and RobWatt, Waterton Lakes NationalPark warden, we have uncoveredthe vast collection of historicalphotographs numbering more than120,000. The survey referred to onthe tree is, to my knowledge, thelast full survey that MorrisonBridgeland completed in his career.Spanning 1928-30, he surveyed theBrazeau country in southern Jasperand northern Banff National Parks.My interpretation is that the signon the tree was a rainy day diver-sion for one of the field crew and nota formal survey monument. It is thesurvey that I most want to return towith our repeat photographic stu-dies. You may be interested in ourproject as it evolves, and is pres-ently captured more fully onwww.mountainlegacy.ca.

ERIC HIGGS, PROFESSOR & DIRECTORSCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA

ScholarshipsI’d like to express my heartfeltthank you for your support of theJohn Deyholos Memorial Scholar-ship (University of Calgary). As oneof this year’s recipients, I was bothsurprised and honoured.

I appreciate your confidence inme and willingness to contribute tomy future education. Receiving thisscholarship will help reduce myfinancial burdens and provideassistance for me as I continuepursuing my studies.

Again, thank you so much forinvesting in my future.

SHAUN TSE

I was nominated to receive the J.H.Holloway Scholarship in GeomaticsEngineering (4th year), and I wouldlike to express my sincerest thanksto you for providing this scholar-ship.

It is an honour to be recognizedfor my hard work and dedication tomy studies. Receiving this scholar-ship motivates me to continue tostrive for excellence and will enable


feat. Itvisits manyof the placesof thehistory andadventureof the furtraders suchas David Thompson, Simon Fraser,Samuel de Champlain, John Cabot,Pierre La Verendrye and manyothers.

It is difficult for those of us thatlive on the prairie to imagine riding15-foot waves of the big lakes therace paddled. The description of the

The 2008 David Thompson Brigade Moves Forward

Paddle, Portages & Pageantryby Doreen GuillouxSelf published in 2006 and available from the author at RR 2, Site17, Box 3, Rocky Mountain House, AB, T4T 2A2,

This is the story of the world’slongest canoe race of 3,283 miles(5,283 kilometres) from RockyMountain House, Alberta to end atExpo 1967 in Montreal, Quebec.This canoe race and the manycentennial celebrations that wereheld along the race route in themultitude of communities along therace route, was the largest event ofall Canada’s 100th birthday celebra-tions in 1967.

The story weaves together theemotions and stamina in the de-scriptions of many of the 100voyageurs of this great Canadian

me to concentrate more on school-work without having to worry aboutfinances. I am a very determinedindividual and a post-secondaryeducation is a priority for me. Yourgift will certainly not be taken forgranted.

Thank you once again for yourcontributions to the University ofCalgary awards program.

AMY SPIERS

It is with great pleasure that theStudent Awards Office announcesthe recipient of the Alberta LandSurveyors’ Association Scholarshipas nominated by the Geomatics

Engineering Technology program atNAIT.

The selected candidate for the2007-2008 academic year is BernardFriesen. Bernard is a second yearstudent in the Geomatics Engineer-ing Technology program. He com-pleted his first year with an hon-ours standing of 89.23%. As such,we are pleased to present him withthis award in the amount of $1,500.

We, at NAIT, are fortunate to seethe impact your award has onstudents; knowing the assistanceyou provide to our students helpsthem to obtain their present andfuture goals. You are a vital link to

the success of NAIT and we trulyappreciate your involvement.

SABRINA GIORDANOSTUDENTS AWARDS COORDINATOR

NORTHERN ALBERTA INSTITUTEOF TECHNOLOGY

I am pleased to inform you that thethe Alberta Land Surveyors’ Asso-ciation Award in Geomatics Engi-neering Technology will be pre-sented to David Wetmore on No-vember 14, 2007.

Thank you for your support ofour Student Awards Program.

AGATA WAJZER, AWARDS ADVISORSTUDENT FINANCIAL AID AND AWARDS

BRITISH COLUMBIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

The 2008 David Thompson Brigadecanoe trip, which is being organizedfrom Edmonton, is in its finalplanning stages. It will start inRocky Mountain House, Alberta onMay 10, 2008 and will end in Thun-der Bay, Ontario on July 12, 2008(64 days).

Alberta Land Surveyors arerepresenting their Association inthis trip with one or more canoes.Paddle, Portages & Pageantry isrequired reading for ourpaddlers. If you would like to jointhe ALSA crew paddling to FortGeorge near Elk Point, Alberta(eight days) or to Fort Carlton,

southwest of Prince Albert, Sas-katchewan (an additional sevendays) contact the ALSA CrewCoordinator Monroe Kinloch di-rectly at [email protected] or byway of the ALSA website atwww.alsa.ab.ca/memberresources.htm#Brigade. There are teamsgoing all the way to Thunder Bay(64 days) and you can also join oneof them. You need to register byJanuary 5, 2008. Canoe and/orwater experience would be helpfulbut is not necessary as this is not arace and sections 01 and 02 are atthe novice paddling level. Thepaddling is six days out of seven

and with a ten-person team therewill be relief paddlers.

This is a canoe brigade where welearn how to handle these bigcanoes downstream as a team ofpaddlers and all get there togethersafely. There will be a lot of fun atthe many community festivitiesalong the North SaskatchewanRiver route. Live the history. TheGPS progress of the actual trip willbe actively transferred to thewebsite 2008thompsonbrigade.com.You can go to this site now to getmany of the details and a map ofthe brigade trip which shows theten sections of the route.

MONROE KINLOCH, ALS

many encounters on Lake Superiorand Lake of the Woods could onlybe told by an author that was anexperienced paddler herself. This isa gripping book, with great detailall along the way and captures thetrials and emotions of the crewsrepresenting eight provinces andtwo territories of Canada.

The book also describes the prerace trials in 1965 and 1966 andother voyageur events in 1992,1999, 2000, 2004, 2005, and 2006 inBritish Columbia, Alberta andSaskatchewan.

It is a book that all Canadianscan relate to as many of them werethere at the community celebrationsalong the race route in 1967. Readand relive the history.



association notes

New Members#784 JEWETT, Kristopher B.

KristopherJewett wasborn inKeswickRidge, NewBrunswick inApril 1976.He graduatedfrom Fred-ericton HighSchool in 1994and received a

B.Sc.Eng. Geomatics from theUniversity of New Brunswick in2002.

Articles were served underAlberta Land Surveyors, RobertMorrison, Ross Woolgar and DavidThomson from January 2003 untilhe received his commission onSeptember 25, 2007. Kristopher isemployed with ChallengerGeomatics Ltd. in Calgary and iscurrently serving on the ALSAPublic Relations Committee.

Surveying experience has in-volved working as an oilfield partychief for Crape Geomatics Corpora-tion and Usher Canada Limited(MMM Geomatics Alberta Limited)as well as municipal managementat Challenger Geomatics Ltd.

Kristopher enjoys skiing, camp-ing and hiking as leisure activities.

#785 THOMPSON, Adam J.F.Adam JohnFrederickThompson wasborn in Wood-stock, NewBrunswick inApril 1976.He graduatedfrom Nack-awic HighSchool in1994 and

went on to receive a B.Sc. (Geoma-tics Engineering) from the Univer-sity of New Brunswick in 2000.

Members on the MoveThe following are changes to theTelephone Listing and Supplementto the Annual Register of Members2007-2008.

ACTIVECaroline Anderson: correction in

September issue of ALS News—e-mail should be:[email protected].

Rocky Annett: new e-mail—[email protected].

Jeff Blatz is now employed withBoundary Technical Group Inc.E-mail address: [email protected].

Bruce Drake: e-mail address [email protected].

Fred Cheng: e-mail address [email protected].

Doug Cloake: e-mail address [email protected].

Hugo Engler: e-mail address [email protected].

Stephen Fediow is now employedwith Fugro/SESL Geomatics Ltd.E-mail address: [email protected].

Jeff Fehr received his commissionas ALS #786 on November 26,2007. Mr. Fehr is employed withAltus Geomatics Limited Part-nership in Grande Prairie.

Barry Fleece is employed with IBIGeomatics Inc. in Calgary. His e-mail address has been changed [email protected]. Hisdirect phone is (403) 270-5600ext. 514.

Cam Foran: residential address ischanged to 14 Oakview Circuit,Brookwater, Queensland 4300,Australia. His e-mail address [email protected].

Rick Gauthier has taken employ-ment with Stewart, Weir & Co.Ltd. in Calgary. His e-mailaddress is [email protected].

Bill Halma has moved to 918 - 3Avenue S, Lethbridge, AB T1J0H9.

Connie Hanrahan resigned fromNAIT on November 22, 2007. Sheis now employed in the Edmon-

Alberta Land Surveyors DougLunty and George Munro served asAdam’s principals from January2002 until he received his commis-sion on October 30, 2007. Adam isalso an engineer-in-training withAPEGGA.

Adam has worked in both mu-nicipal and oilfield surveys since1998. He also worked in Chad,Africa from 2000 to 2002. Surveyingexperience before that was withGeodetic Canada from 1996 to 1997.

Adam enjoys woodworking,landscaping, golf and family time.Charity and Adam Thompson andtheir nine-month old son, Eric,reside in Medicine Hat where he isemployed with Focus SurveysLimited Partnership.

#786 FEHR, Jeffery A.Jeffery AllanFehr was bornin July 1970at Edmonton,Alberta. HeattendedLaCretePublic HighSchool andwent on toreceive anengineering

degree from the University ofCalgary in 2002.

Greg Stromsmoe, ALS andPhilippe Breau, ALS served asJeff’s principals from January 2003until he received his commission onNovember 26, 2007. Surveyingexperience includes utility, oilfieldand municipal surveying. He iscurrently employed with AltusGeomatics in Grande Prairie. Jeff isalso an engineer-in-training withAPEGGA.

He enjoys fishing, spending timeoutdoors, and spending time withfamily. Heide and Jeff Fehr residein SexSmith, Alberta with theirchildren Samuel (11 years), Jared (7years), Sierra (6 years), Hailey (5years), Joel (2 years) and Hannah (9months).


ton office of ChallengerGeomatics Ltd. New e-mail:[email protected].

John Ironstone: residentialaddress is changed to PO Box649, St. Paul, AB T0A 3A0; Tel:(780) 645-5415.

Hal Janes: e-mail address [email protected].

Kris Jewett received his commis-sion as ALS #784 on September25, 2007. Mr. Jewett is employedwith Challenger Geomatics Ltd.in Calgary.

Bob MacDormand: new e-mail—[email protected].

Robert Morrison is now withPrecision Geomatics Inc. inCalgary. His new e-mail addressis [email protected].

Rich Nixon has moved to the FortSt. John office of Can-AmGeomatics.

Connie Petersen is now at theBrooks office of Midwest SurveysInc.

Gerry Smyth is now at theCalgary office of Midwest Sur-veys Inc.

Adam Thompson received hiscommission as ALS #785 onOctober 30, 2007. Mr. Thompsonis employed with Focus SurveysLimited Partnership in MedicineHat.

Paul Westersund: e-mail addressis [email protected].

HONORARY LIFEBill Dabbs: e-mail address is

[email protected].

RETIREDKeith Davidson has moved to 35

Grier Place NE, Suite 4101 inCalgary T2K 5Y5.

DECEASEDHal Falkenberg passed away on

November 2, 2007. An obituaryappears on page 51 of this issueof ALS News.

ARTICLED STUDENTSScott Colvin ceased to be an

articled student on September14, 2007.

Jason Deschamps is now em-ployed with Maltais GeomaticsInc. in Calgary.

Ryan Gordon is now employed byMidwest Surveys Inc. in PeaceRiver.

Constance Jangwa transferedarticles from Stephen VanBerkel, ALS to Doug Neufeld,ALS of Hamilton & Olsen Sur-veys Ltd. effective October 31,2007.

Michael Lee transfered articlesfrom Geoff Hobbs, ALS to JerryRasmuson, ALS of MaltaisGeomatics Inc. on September 5,2007.

Peter Lund signed articles withJohn Matthyssen, ALS of FocusSurveys Limited Partnership inCalgary on effective June 25,2007.

Ryan McKellar terminated arti-cles with James Sloan, ALS onOctober 25, 2007.

Lisa Monk articled to PaulWestersund, ALS of Measure-ment Sciences in Calgary onOctober 22, 2007.

Sara Prescot transfered articlesfrom Caroline Anderson, ALS toIain Skinner, ALS of FocusSurveys Limited Partnership inCalgary on November 2, 2007.

Patrick Wetherup transferedarticles to John Matthyssen, ALSon August 29 and is now locatedat the 2891 Sunridge Way NEoffice of Focus Surveys LimitedPartnership in Calgary.

David Young is no longer em-ployed with Navland GeomaticsInc.

AFFILIATEEduardo Linhares (AF042)

became an affiliate member onSeptember 5, 2007. Eduardo isemployed with StantecGeomatics Ltd. in Calgary.

Jaroslaw Matejko (AF043)became an affiliate member onSeptember 5, 2007. Jaroslaw isemployed with Crape GeomaticsCorporation in Calgary.

Jason Whale ceased to be anaffiliate member effective Octo-ber 3, 2007.

ASSOCIATEJeremy Dawson has moved to

10157 - 134A Street, Suite 107,Surrey, BC V3T 5L7.

CORPORATIONSAltus Geomatic Limited Part-

nership has removed their postoffice box from their mailingaddress. The postal code for theirstreet address is now T9V 2W7.

Halma Surveys MMMGeomatics Alberta Limited:new website— www.mmm.ca;new e-mail addresses:[email protected];[email protected];[email protected].

Principia Geomatics Inc. wasregistered as a surveyor’s corpo-ration with permit number P237on October 12, 2007. MetinTimocin is the Alberta LandSurveyor responsible for thesupervision, direction and controlof the corporation. The contactinformation is:18 - 9 Street SEMedicine Hat T1A 1M9Tel: (403) 878-7414 or 529-9257Fax: (403) 529-6722E-mail: [email protected].

Tara Lacerte Joins theStaff at the ALSATara is anativeEdmontonionborn inAugust1988. Shegraduatedfrom RossSheppardHigh Schoolin 2006.Whileattendingschool, she decided to take a trip toParis, France for her first time andended up having a love for theirculture. Needless to say, she re-turned to Paris, France for a secondtrip a year later. Her interestsinclude an incredible love for ani-mals including two of her own,social events with friends andfamily, scrap-booking and traveling.She looks forward to a long andwonderful career with the AlbertaLand Surveyors’ Association.


Question TimeWhat is the timeline for submit-ting project reports?

As stated in the project reportguidelines, a minimum of oneproject report must be submittedwithin two years of the studentsigning articles with a minimum ofone project report per year thereaf-ter. Please note that this statementis not based on the calendar year. Ifa student’s articles began in Janu-ary 2006, the first project report isdue before the anniversary date inJanuary 2008. Even though anarticled student or affiliate membercan begin submitting project reportsat any time, the absolute deadlinefor the first one is within two yearsof signing up.

What is the involvement of thestudent and principal withrespect to project reports?

Student Involvement: As statedin the Project Report Guidelines,“The student should be prepared topersonally complete the fieldwork for each of the three projectreports at the party chief or supervi-sory level.” The intent here is clear.The student is required to be in thefield for all three projects and toact as either the party chief or asthe field supervisor. Implicit to thisstatement, is the fact that thestudent cannot act in a supervisoryrole until such time as the studenthas acquired significant experienceat the party chief level. If appropri-

Multimedia LandRecords Progress ReportUnder the supervision of Dr.Michael Barry and funded by ALSA,it has been a year since I started myMSc. program in Geomatics Engi-neering at the University ofCalgary.

During this period, I have beenworking on analyzing cadastralmodels and developing land recordsystems. As a result, I developed amultimedia cadastral model that issufficiently flexible to serve a widerange of situations. Moreover, usingthe Microsoft.Net programming

language, I am developing theobject manager software which, indesign at least, is a simple landrecord system that is capable ofstoring and retrieving differenttypes cadastral data, includingmultimedia data.

For testing purposes, I populatedthe software with local and interna-tional cadastral survey and titlingdata. The data includes real cadas-tral data for Alberta (downloadedfrom the SPIN system), and datathat Dr. Barry has collected inSomaliland, Nigeria, and SouthAfrica.

Most of the system’s require-ments were acquired from the

interviews that I have conductedwith a vast spectrum of cadastraland survey professionals, in theLand Titles Office and licensedsurveyors from different provinces.

Currently, I am in my secondyear of my master’s programme. Iintend to defend my thesis inSeptember 2008.

Finally, I would like to thankALSA for your ongoing support ofpost-secondary education in cadas-tral studies.

ABDEL-RAHMAN MUHSENMSC. CANDIDATE

GEOMATICS ENGINEERINGUNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

ate, the student may act as a fieldsupervisor and would be expected,as a minimum, to perform theinitial evidence assessment, toprovide detailed instructions to thesurvey crew, to be present duringall or a portion of the field observa-tions and to inspect the final place-ment of statutory monuments. It isexpected that the extent of thestudent’s involvement will increasesubstantially with each project. Forinstance, the hands-on involvementwith the first project will likely beconfined to the field work and thepre-drafting computations, whileplaying a lesser role in the clientliaison, job setup and final submis-sion phases. Student involvementwith the last project is expected tobe hands-on in every aspect of theproject.

Principal Involvement: Theproject is to be viewed as such, aproject. The student shall completeeach phase of the project under thesupervision of the principal. Thepurpose of completing the project isto familiarize the pupil with eachpart of a survey project, from theinitial inquiry by the client to thefinal product. One of the mostfundamental reasons for doing aproject is to provide an opportunityfor the principal and the student tofocus on each aspect of the project.It cannot be over-emphasized thatprincipal involvement in eachproject is paramount. The principalis expected to proofread the pupil’sreport.

When do I submit my Affidavitof Service?Affidavits of Service are to besubmitted to the Association officeno later than January 15th of eachyear regardless of when articlescommenced. The Affidavit of Serv-ice form as well as a sample can befound on the ALSA website on thearticling/affiliate member page atwww.alsa.ab.ca/MemberResources/articling-affiliate.htm.

Have youregistered yet?

99th ALS99th ALS99th ALS99th ALS99th ALSAAAAAAnnual GenerAnnual GenerAnnual GenerAnnual GenerAnnual Generalalalalal

MeetingMeetingMeetingMeetingMeeting

FFFFFairmontairmontairmontairmontairmontChateau LakChateau LakChateau LakChateau LakChateau Lake Louisee Louisee Louisee Louisee Louise

April 24th to 26th, 2008April 24th to 26th, 2008April 24th to 26th, 2008April 24th to 26th, 2008April 24th to 26th, 2008


Implications of the Delgamuukw DecisionRebecca Broten, Michael Barry and Oliver W. MacLaren,University of Calgary — Summer 2007

1.0 IntroductionIn this article we briefly describeand analyze the Delgamuukw cases,which have had a major impact onaboriginal land law internationally.The context of our investigation isthe use of multimedia data asevidentiary tools in resolving landdisputes and reducing the numberof potential disputes1. Delgamuukwis the first of a number of Canadianand international land law caseswhich we are examining as part of amultimedia land records study inorder to develop principles of goodpractice and identify some of thedifficulties in acquiring such evi-dence.

2.0 HistoryThe Delgamuukw action began in1984 when the chiefs of two FirstNation groups, Gitksan andWet’suwet’en, filed suit against theprovince of British Columbia (BC),seeking “ownership of and jurisdic-tion over”2 58,000 square kilome-tres- of land in northern BC. TheGitksan and Wet’suwet’en claimedthese lands as their traditionalterritory, and like most First Nationgroups in BC, they had neversigned a treaty or land claim agree-ment and, therefore, could arguethat they had never ceded title,aboriginal title or in fact any form ofpartial rights (e.g. servitudes orleases) over those lands. The deci-sion to launch the suit came aftermany years of attempting to initiatetreaty talks with both the provincialand federal governments, and beingrefused audience.3

The land involved is home toabout 5,000 Gitksan, 2,000Wet’suwet’en and 30,000 non-aboriginal people4, and encom-passes approximately 6.5 % of thetotal land area of the province. It isheavily forested (and heavilylogged), mineral wealthy (coal andmolybdenum have been minedthere) and has abundant wildlifeand fish stocks, especially salmon.

Judge Alan McEachern presidedover the first case which began in

1987 in the BC SupremeCourt, ultimately dis-missing the claim foraboriginal ownershiprights in 1991. This trialjudgment held aboriginalrights to exist “at thepleasure of the Crown,”and were extinguished atthe time of colonization5.Furthermore, the trialjudge held that he couldnot grant ownershipbecause aboriginalrights, if they could beproven to exist, consti-tuted only a “personaland usufructuary”6 rightto the land as set out in1888 by the Privy Coun-cil in the St. Catherine’sMilling case7. In addi-tion, the First Nationsgroups had “not demonstrated therequisite degree of occupationrequired for ‘ownership’”8 despitemonths of testimony from archae-ologists and others, and oral histo-ries presented by the elders, oftenin their respective first languages.

To clarify, in concept, ownershipis allodial in character. It impliesthat the owner’s rights of enjoy-ment, management and disposalover property are paramount overany other rights that may exist inthe land in favour of other personsor the state9. In simple terms,ownership as derived from Romanlaw incorporates the concepts of (1)usus – the right to use; (2) fructus –the rights to the fruits or revenuesand profits of the land; and (3)abusus – the right to destroy,change substantially or alienate theland. Since the St. Catherine’sMilling case, the Canadian courtsheld that only the first two of theselegal concepts are present in abo-riginal rights until the notion beganto be challenged in the 1970s and‘80s, especially following thepatriation of the Constitution andthe recognition of aboriginal rightstherein in 1982. One should notethat if one applies the conceptstrictly, full ownership (i.e. allodial

tenure) does not exist in manyCommonwealth countries whichhave received English law, Canadaincluded. An estate (e.g. a freeholdin fee simple estate) is still be-holden to the Crown, which holds

Figure 1:The Delgammukw Claim

FOOTNOTES __________________________1 See MacLaren O and Barry M 2007. Video

Evidence and The Land Surveyor in aChanging Technological Environment. ALSNews, June 2007.

2 McEachern, A. (1993) Native Land Claimsin British Columbia: Judgment of theHonourable Chief Justice AllanMcEachern. http://victoria.tc.ca/history/etext/delgamuukw.land.judgment.html.lines 399-400

3 Gitxsan Chiefs’ Office (No date) TheDelamuukw court action. [online] Availablefrom: http://www.gitxsan.com/html/delga2.htm

4 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3S.C.R. 1010 (para. 8 and 9)

5 ibid, para. 236 ibid, para. 177 St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Co. v.

The Queen (1888) 14 App. Cas. 46(J.C.P.C.). See also McNeil, K. (1998)Defining aboriginal title in the 90’s: Hasthe Supreme Court finally got it right?[online] Available from: http://www.delgamuukw.org/perspectives/defining.pdf. p.2

8 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3S.C.R. 1010 (Under: The content ofaboriginal title…)

9 Nwabueze B O 1972. Nigerian Land Law,Nwamife Publishers, Enugu, Oceana, NewYork. p 7-8.


Canada.14 The final judicial holdinginstead called for a re-assessment ofthe facts based on the correctstandard of interpretation of theaboriginal oral histories. Instead,the significance of the Delgamuukwdecision resides in its clear defini-tion of what aboriginal title consti-tutes, and how it is to be proven tothe satisfaction of the courts.

3.1 Admissibility of OralHistory Evidence

Chief Justice Lamer’s judgmentindicates that the admissibility oforal history evidence is a manifesta-tion of the evidentiary principlesestablished in another SupremeCourt decision, R. v. Van der Peet15,in which the Supreme Court held“that the common law rules ofevidence [ ] be adapted” to take intoaccount the unique nature andcharacteristics of aboriginal rights.16

That this adaptation takes the formof admitting oral history evidence isrationalized through the SupremeCourt’s acknowledgment that suchevidence is often the only history ofan aboriginal group’s past. Inaboriginal rights cases where pre-sovereignty activities justify thebasis for the claim, oral historiestherefore “play a crucial role in thelitigation.”17

The judicial flexibility required toaccommodate such a holding is notlost on the Chief Justice, whorecognizes the “tangential” history,legend, mythology, politics, andmoral obligations interwoven intothe legally relevant elements of oralhistory testimony. Additionally,that oral history testimony largelyconsists of out-of-court statementsbeing admitted for their truthmeans that this kind of testimonyconflicts with the general courtroomrule against the admissibility ofhearsay.18 Nevertheless, Lamer isclear that notwithstanding thesechallenges, oral history evidencemust both be admitted and “placedon an equal footing with the typesof historical evidence that courtsare familiar with, which largelyconsists of historical documents.”19

To accommodate the concernsexpressed above, the court is in-structed to evaluate such evidenceon a case-by-case basis.

The case-by-case analysis that isthen undertaken by the SupremeCourt serves as an instructive guidefor how the various forms of oralhistory testimony should be judi-cially considered. Oral evidence ofthe claimants re-considered in theChief Justice’s judgment rangedfrom the sacred oral performancesof the aforementioned Adaawk(Gitksan collection of sacred oraltradition about ancestors, histories,and territories) and Kungax(Wet’suwet’en spiritual song, dance,or performance which ties them totheir land), as well as more per-sonal and informal recollections ofaboriginal life, and territorialaffidavits of use and ownership ofthe land by deceased persons.

3.1.1 Adaawk and KungaxWith respect to the admission andevidentiary influence of the sacredoral texts, Lamer’s mention of theinternal checks and balances indi-cates how such evidence will bejudicially scrutinized for authentic-ity. Equally important is the men-tion of the Adaawk and Kungax asfalling under an already establishedexception to the general ruleagainst the admissibility of hearsay,that allows for “declarations madeby deceased persons … given inevidence by witnesses as proof ofpublic or general rights.”20

the right of reversion in the case ofescheat.

The Delgamuukw case was takento the BC Court of Appeal in 1993.While the appeal court largelyupheld the trial judge’s ruling, anotable exception was made withrespect to the issue of extinguish-ment. The majority of appeal jus-tices stated there had been no “clearand plain” extinguishment of theaboriginal right to use and occupythe lands put down at the time ofcolonization.10 In turn, this meantthat the Constitution Act of 1982,which affirmed all aboriginal andtreaty rights not yet extinguishedby 1982, continued to protect theserights also.11 The justices alsocommented on the unfortunatewording of the first suit, statingonce again that aboriginal “owner-ship” cannot exist.12

The suit was reclassified as anappeal for aboriginal title and wastaken to the Supreme Court ofCanada in 1997. The SupremeCourt is the highest court to whicha party can appeal in Canada. Thedecision has become a landmark inCanada, and in places like the USA,New Zealand, Australia, and morerecently southern Africa.

3.0 The Supreme Court ofCanada Decision

The Supreme Court agreed with theappeal court that the rights of FirstNations had not been extinguished,finding that the trial judge haderred on this point. The Court alsofound that insufficient weight hadbeen given to the Adaawk andKungax (the sacred oral histories ofthe Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en,respectively) more general oralhistories, and territorial affidavitsof past inhabitants.13 This was seenas a major personal victory for theFirst Nations peoples. As thesecultures did not traditionally keepwritten records, such a judicialholding would allow aboriginalgroups to compete on a more bal-anced evidentiary playing field inthe courts.

With respect to the formal claim,however, it is important to note thatthe plaintiffs were not grantedaboriginal title; indeed, to date nogroup has been granted such title in

FOOTNOTES __________________________10 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia [1993] 5

W.W.R. 97 (B.C.C.A.). See also, McNeil,Kent (2000) Aboriginal title as a constitu-tionally protected property right. In:Lippert, Owen (ed) Beyond the Nass valley:national implications of the SupremeCourt’s Delgamuukw decision. Vancouver,The Fraser Institute. p. 36

11 ibid., McNeil p. 61.12 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 para. 3213 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010, para.107 and 18314 BC Treaty Commission (No date) A lay

person’s guide to understandingDelgamuukw. [online] Available from:http://www.bctreaty.net/files_2/pdf_documents/delgamuukw.pdf. p. 3

15 R. v. Van der Peet, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 50716 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia(1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010, para. 3.17 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010, para 84.18 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3



S.C.R. 1010 para. 95


This more familiar treatment ofcertain aspects of the oral testimonyin turn allows the court moreflexibility with respect to eviden-tially uncharacteristic aspects oforal histories generally. Whereas atthe first trial in the BC SupremeCourt, the utility of the sacred oralhistories to demonstrate use andoccupation of the land was dis-missed, as the trial judge foundperformances and narratives to be“seriously lacking in detail aboutthe specific lands to which they aresaid to relate,”21 the Supreme Courtof Canada judgment is bolder. TheBC court’s finding that oral histo-ries do not accurately convey his-torical truth, that they are confinedto the communities from which theyarise, and that they are sometimesinsufficiently detailed “are features,to a greater or lesser extent, of alloral histories,” and should not bejudicially undervalued in light ofthese concerns. To do so would be“in contradiction of the expressinstruction … in Van der Peet thattrial courts interpret the evidence ofaboriginal peoples in light of thedifficulties inherent in adjudicatingaboriginal claims.”22

3.1.2 Recollections ofAboriginal Life

With respect to the testimonydealing with recollections of aborigi-nal life (testimony of personal andfamily history not part of the sacredstories,) Lamer’s comments areequally encompassing. Again, suchtestimony was dismissed in the trialjudgment for failing “to providedefinitive and precise evidence ofpre-contact aboriginal activities onthe territory in question.” YetLamer cites this standard of proofas “almost an impossible burden tomeet,” stating that the oral historyshould not be summarily dismissedon this attribute alone. Instead, “itmay still be relevant to demonstratethat current occupation has itsorigins prior to sovereignty.” Giventhe importance of continuity be-tween past and present occupationin establishing aboriginal title(outlined in section 2.3 below), therole for this type of testimonyremains significant indeed.

3.1.3 Territorial Affidavits Lastly, the Chief Justice holds thatthe trial judge’s exclusion of theterritorial affidavits on account oftheir relation to the disputed claimdid not acknowledge “that claims toaboriginal rights, and aboriginaltitle in particular, are almostalways disputed and contested.”Instead, the Supreme Court judg-ment indicates that territorialaffidavits which rely heavily on thedeclarations of deceased persons ofuse or ownership of lands should beadmitted through the reputationexception to the hearsay rule. (Wediscuss the hearsay rule and admis-sible evidence in detail in our articlein ALS News in June 2007.)23

3.2 Aboriginal Title DefinedThe St. Catherine’s Milling case,which took place between 1882 and1886, established, in an oft citedpassage by Lord Watson in thePrivy Council, that “the tenure ofthe Indians was a personal andusufructuary right, dependent uponthe good will of the Sovereign.”24

Chief Justice Lamer stated in hisruling that aboriginal title is morethan just a usufructuary right: “itis a right to the land itself.”25 Thusaboriginal title is a real propertyinterest, equal to other propertyinterests,26 and not merely givingrise to personal interests, but withthree major differences. The first isthat it is sui generis, meaning thatit is of unique origin and uniquenature. It therefore cannot bederived from any known law (i.e.British), or for that matter, exclu-sively from aboriginal law. It mustaccept all inputs.27 The second isthat it is held communally by allmembers of a First Nation group.Finally, aboriginal title differs fromother property interests because itis inalienable. It may only be sold tothe Crown.

Although the court rejected thenotion that aboriginal title isequivalent to an inalienable feesimple system, they nonethelessrecognized it as a true propertyinterest. Slattery suggests that thecourt has in effect stated thatalienability then is not a prerequi-site for a property right.28 Anotherimplication of the decision stemsfrom the communal nature of the

title. If the land is held commu-nally, and can only be surrenderedby group consensus, then thedecision may provide a “legalumbrella, in the shelter of whichthe customary law of an aboriginalgroup may develop and flourish.”29

Such a scenario may be helpful inconstructing future argumentsinvolving self-governance.

3.2.1 Exclusive Use andOccupation

In accordance with s.18 of theIndian Act, aboriginal title encom-passes the exclusive right to use theland “for any purpose for the gen-eral welfare of the band.”30 Thiswas interpreted by the Court tomean that lands under aboriginaltitle are not bound by traditionaluses, and in fact may be used forany purpose whatsoever. Impor-tantly, this also means that aborigi-nal title encompasses mineralrights, and that the land may beexploited to suit present day needs.This was the first time mineralrights had expressly been granted,although it had been implied in theIndian Oil and Gas Act. Thus,“general welfare of the band” indi-cated an entitlement of the holdersof the title to benefit financiallyfrom any exploitation of the titledlands.31

FOOTNOTES __________________________21 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 para 9722 Delgamuukw v. British Colubmia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 para 9823 MacLaren O and Barry M 2007. Video

Evidence and The Land Surveyor in aChanging Technological Environment. ALSNews, June 2007

24 Supra note 7.25 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 (Under: The content ofaboriginal title…)

26 Mandel, L. (1998) The DelgamuukwDecision. [online] Available from: http://www.delgamuukw.org/perspectives/decision.pdf. p.4

27 Slattery, Brian (2000) The nature ofaboriginal title. In: Lippert, Owen (ed)Beyond the Nass valley: national implica-tions of the Supreme Court’s Delgamuukwdecision. Vancouver, The Fraser Institute.p. 15

28 ibid, p. 1529 ibid, p.1630 As quoted in: Slattery (2000) op. cit., p. 1731 Slattery (2000) op. cit., p. 17-18


3.2.2 Inherent LimitationsAlthough holders of aboriginal titlehave unrestricted use of the lands,the court imposed an “inherentlimit” on that use. The limit is such:a forbidden use is one that is “irrec-oncilable with the nature of thegroup’s attachment to that land”and that would prevent the group’sfuture use of that land. Althoughthis appears somewhat contradic-tory, Chief Justice Lamer wascareful to point out that aboriginaltitle does not restrict the uses totraditional ones: That wouldamount to a legal straitjacket onAboriginal peoples who have alegitimate legal claim to the land.”32

Therefore aboriginal title is notrestricted to past uses, but it issomewhat restrained by them. Topursue an activity that is notpermitted by this limitation, agroup must first surrender title tothat land.33

McNeil has argued that thisaspect of the decision is unnecessar-ily “paternalistic.” He believesAboriginal people would not beinclined to damage lands since itwould threaten their culturalheritage. He points out that theprotection of lands is seen by Na-tives as their responsibility, and isoften the driving force behindinjunctions and suits for title orownership.34

Others argue that aboriginalgroups should not be entitled todestroy lands “given” to them in theinterest of cultural preservation,since that would defeat the point. Itis submitted that Chief JusticeLamer’s judgment most reasonablyfollows this line of thinking.

3.3 Establishing Aboriginal TitleAnother important aspect of thisdecision is that it sets the criteria tobe used to determine if a claim foraboriginal title is valid. To proveaboriginal title, a group must firstshow that they occupied the land“at the time at which the Crownasserted sovereignty over theland.”35 This is in contrast to theprevious time-zero, the date of firstcontact between the Crown and theFirst Nation, which is very difficultto determine precisely. This alsoallows groups seeking title tosupplement their arguments with

written accounts, such as thosefrom Hudson’s Bay traders andexplorers. Secondly, they mustshow near-continuous occupation ofthe land in question to present day,but that occupation need not beintensive. If that were the case,nearly all land except for villagesites or similar would be excluded,proving a severe restriction onnomadic groups. The “near-continu-ous” modifier is to account for timesin which groups were unable to usethe land due to suppression or otherfactors (for example, potlatchceremonies were outlawed until themid-fifties.) Lastly, the courts werenow to give traditional oral histo-ries legal independent weight whenproving occupancy of an area.36

3.4 Self-governanceIn this case, the court ruled that itcould not make a judgment on theissue of Native self-governmentbecause of the trial judge’s insuffi-cient weighting of the oral histo-ries37, although as discussed above,the requirement that aboriginaltitle be held communally impliesthat some form of internal govern-ment is necessary and even ex-pected if a First Nations groupwishes to surrender its aboriginaltitle over a piece of land.

3.5 Infringement andExtinguishment

The court tempered its judgmentsignificantly in that it made allow-ances for infringements of aborigi-nal title. In very broad terms,Lamer stated that provincial orfederal governments may infringeon aboriginal title if the infringe-ment “furthers a compelling andsubstantial legislative objective”such as “the development of agricul-ture, forestry, mining, and hydro-electric power, [or] … generaleconomic development.”38 This partof the decision has come undermuch scrutiny. Some argue thatsince aboriginal title is a constitu-tionally protected right (under theConstitution Act, 1982) that thegovernment should have even lessright to infringe on it than it does toinfringe on fee simple propertyholdings, which are not constitu-tionally protected.39

The court did stipulate, however,that any infringement of rightsmust be preceded by consultation,and that the infringed-upon party isto receive fair accommodation orcompensation. Furthermore, Lamerdecreed that the consultation was a“fiduciary obligation” and thereforemust be done in good faith. Incertain circumstances, the fullagreement of the affected FirstNations group may be requiredbefore a project can proceed.40

While this sounds satisfactory,Flanagan raises an interestingquestion: why should a third party,namely the government, have thelegal authority to use the lands inways that the holders of the titlecannot?41 For instance, the provincemay decide to mine an area that isculturally sensitive. They willconsult and pay all the requiredcompensation surely, but the mainissue here is that the holders of thetitle, the First Nations groups,would be restricted from initiatingthat same project due to the inher-ent limitations placed on the landby the courts.

Regarding the issue of extin-guishment, the court ruled thatboth the Constitution Act, 1867 ands. 88 of the Indian Act preclude theprovinces from extinguishingaboriginal rights; the federalgovernment, however, as the legis-lator of the Constitution Act has thejurisdiction to extinguish aboriginalrights if it chooses.42

FOOTNOTES __________________________32 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 (para. 132)33 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3


34 McNeil (1998) op. cit., p.5-635 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3


36 Mandel.(1998) op. cit., p. 16-1737 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 (para. 170)38 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 (Under: Infringements ofaboriginal title…)

39 McNeil (1998) p. 9-1140 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3


41 Flanagan, T. (2000) First Nations? Secondthoughts. Montreal and Kingston, McGill-Queen’s U.P. p. 132

42 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3S.C.R. 1010 (Under: Extinguishment)


4.0 ConclusionsThe Delgamuukw action is widelyconsidered to be a landmark case.Specifically, this case was instru-mental in defining aboriginal titleas a real property interest, settingout a test by which to prove aborigi-nal title, and giving traditional oralhistories legal weight. What is ofinterest is that some people in theGitskan band have started todevelop a land information systemwhich can capture oral historiesand stories from the elders usingvideo clips. There are, however,complex problems associated withthis, which will be discussed in aforthcoming article.43

Additionally, the judgmentupheld the finding that aboriginalrights had not been extinguished inBritish Columbia, indicating a lackof provincial authority to do so.Chief Justice Lamer concluded byencouraging further action to betaken through negotiation ratherthan litigation. In doing so, hestipulated the government’s duty tonegotiate in good faith.44

However, the case did not ad-dress all the issues that will eventu-ally need to be agreed upon for trueclosure in this issue. The issue ofNative self-governance is among themost important. The SupremeCourt refused to make any generalstatements on this issue, sayingthat decisions would need to bemade on a case-by-case basis.45

Several other questions come tomind regarding this issue. If abo-riginal title were to be granted,what would happen to the holdersof fee simple properties on thatland? The BC Treaty Commissionsays that the solution is “morelikely to be the payment of compen-sation than any adjustment toprivate ownership”46 but that ishardly definitive. Would the ownersof those properties fall under Abo-riginal government if it existed?

A further question ariseswhether different rules for admissi-bility of evidence might apply in theevent in the event of a disputebetween an Aboriginal group andadjacent fee simple land holders orexisting fee simple fee simpleholders within an area which hasbeen granted aboriginal title. Theformer case is an unlikely scenario,

but, nonetheless, one which is ofinterest to land surveyors. We don’tknow the answer, but one canspeculate that given the existence ofa fee simple owner, the oral historyevidence would have to be suffi-ciently strong to contradict, on anequal footing, the evidence estab-lishing the fee simple ownership asparamount to the title claim.

And what of the First Nations—now legally bound by the Constitu-tion Act of 1982 to hold propertycommunally? Traditionally, manyNative groups operated as familiesor lineage groups, not as an entirepeople. How long will it take, andhow much process and hardshipwill it take, to come to a collectivedecision on every land issue?Flanagan argues that First Nationpeoples are likely to be bound topoverty by the forced collectivenature of land title. He argues thatthe time required to reach consen-sus would undermine a band’smarket competitiveness.47 There areof course counter arguments to thisassertion, but space does not permitus to explore this.

And how much money will theeconomy lose overall if aboriginaltitle is granted to even a majority ofthose that seek it? The costs associ-ated with doing business on landsheld by aboriginal title will behigher due to the required compen-sation component.48 At present,land claims in British Columbiaexceed the actual surface area.Overlapping claims are common.Justice Lamer made reference tothe overlaps and suggested that allaffected parties be present atnegotiations49. The difficultiesincrease. Negotiations will nowrequire four or more parties, andthe agreement of not one, but two ormore, entire First Nation groups.

It may be difficult, but a resolu-tion must be found. Canada is notalone in this issue: the UnitedStates, New Zealand, and Australiaface similar difficulties. The Huipeople of Hawaii were so concernedwith this case that they asked totestify in the BC Court of Appealcase as amicae curae (friends of thecourt)50. But one last, importantcontribution of the Delgamuukwcase the Supreme Court’s rulingthat these issues must be discussed

and discussed fairly. Chief JusticeLamer stated that it is the duty ofthe courts to learn to hear cases ofthis nature fairly, regardless of thedifficulty51. It is also upon the levelsof government and Aboriginalpeoples to pursue out-of-courtnegotiation as much as possible,and to work towards a solutionbecause, as he said, “Let us face it,we are all here to stay.”52

FOOTNOTES __________________________43 Barry M and Khan K 2005. Developing

Talking Titler Methods in Creating LandRecords. Research Report to NaturalResources Canada, Surveyor General,Western Region.

44 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3S.C.R. 1010 (para. 186)

45 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3S.C.R. 1010 (para. 171)

46 BC Treaty Commission (No date) op. cit.,p. 3

47 Flanagan (2000), op. cit., p. 132-13348 ibid, p. 132-13349 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 (para. 185)50 Supra note 10.51 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3 S.C.R. 1010 (para. 87)52 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1997), 3

S.C.R. 1010 (para. 186)

ReferencesBarry M and Khan K 2005. Develop-

ing Talking Titler Methods inCreating Land Records. ResearchReport to Natural ResourcesCanada, Surveyor General, WesternRegion.

BC Treaty Commission (No date) Alay person’s guide to understandingDelgamuukw. [online] Availablefrom: http://www.bctreaty.net/files_2/pdf_documents/delgamuukw.pdf[Accessed January 26, 2006].

Daly, R. (2005) Our box was full: Anethnography for the Delgamuukwplaintiffs. Vancouver, UBC Press.

Delgamuukw v. British Columbia(1997), 3 S.C.R. 1010 (SupremeCourt of Canada).

Delgamuukw v. British Columbia[1993] 5 W.W.R. 97 (British Colum-bia Court of Appeal).

Gitxsan Chiefs’ Office (No date) TheDelamuukw court action. [online]Available from: http://www.gitxsan.com/html/delga2.htm[Accessed January 15, 2006].

MacLaren O. and Barry M. 2007.Video Evidence and The LandSurveyor in a Changing Technologi-cal Environment. ALS News, June2007, 36(2), 26 – 33.

....continued on page 52





spr messageby Fred Cheng, ALS

Official Settlement Surveys— Surveys of PublicLand Within Unsurveyed Territory in Alberta.

Background

Over the past few months, Ihave received several calls frompractitioners and articled studentsinquiring about the proper nomen-clature for surveys of public landwithin unsurveyed territory inAlberta and how to go about execut-ing them.

A student-at-law called recentlyand inquired as to the differencebetween a river lot and a settlementlot within the land subdivisionregime in Alberta.

One practitioner was preparing arequest for proposal (RFP) for asubdivision straddling surveyed andunsurveyed territories and calledfor my advice regarding proper fieldsurveys and time estimations, as hehad not had much opportunity todeal with one before. I advised himthat two plans would be required inthis situation. First, the parcel ofland within unsurveyed territorywould be surveyed as an officialsettlement plan and confirmed bythe Director of Surveys. The entirearea could then be subdivided by asecond plan.

Practitioners are reminded thatPart D, Section 8 of the currentManual of Standard Practice dealswith official surveys which includessurveys of public land within unsur-veyed territory.

The Director of Surveys (DOS) isto be consulted prior to any publicland survey in unsurveyed territorytakes place. Official survey instruc-tions are required from the Directorof Surveys Office and final fieldreturns are examined by their staff,and the final plan is “confirmed” bythe Director of Surveys prior to itssubmission to the Land TitlesOffice.

Legislative RequirementsSection 29 of the current SurveysAct [RSA 2000, c. S-26] indicatesthat surveys of public lands, withinunsurveyed territory, under parttwo of the legislation, shall conformto either the township system orany other system (settlement)appropriate to the circumstances.

Section 33 of the current SurveysAct [RSA 2000 Chapter S-26] legis-lates the following requirements forsurveys within public lands (unsur-veyed territory) of Alberta:33(1) A plan of public land sur-

veyed pursuant to Section 29 or aplan of Metis patented landsurveyed pursuant to Section 32.(a) shall be plotted from thesurveyor’s field notes under thedirection of the Director, and(b) shall show the directions andlengths of the boundaries, thenature and positions of themonuments and the areas of theparcels laid out.

(2) The confirmation of a planreferred to in subsection (1) by theDirector shall be held to be aconfirmation of the survey andthe confirmed plan is the officialplan.

(3) No land is considered to besurveyed until the official planhas been confirmed by the Direc-tor.

(4) If the official plan is found tohave been improperly or incor-

...surveys of Public Lands, within unsurveyed territoryunder Part Two of the said legislation, shall conform toeither the township system or any other system(settlement) appropriate to the circumstances.

rectly plotted from the field notesof the survey, or if any omissionor clerical error or other defect isfound on the plan, the Directormay cause a new plan to be madeshowing the omission, error ordefect corrected and the new planshall, after it has been confirmedby the Director, become theofficial plan and shall be used forall purposes instead of the oldplan.

(5) The Director shall, forthwithafter the confirmation undersubsections (2) and

(4), file one copy of the officialplan with the Registrar.

When performing a survey ofpublic land under Section 33 of theSurveys Act, subdivision approvalmay not be required with referenceto Section 652 of the MunicipalGovernment Act [RSA 2000 ChapterM-26] wherein it states:652 (1) A Registrar may not accept

for registration an instrumentthat has the effect or may havethe effect of subdividing a parcelof land unless the subdivision hasbeen approved by a subdivisionauthority.

(2) Despite subsection (1) andsubject to subsection (4), a Regis-trar may accept for registrationwithout subdivision approval aninstrument that has the effect ormay have the effect of subdividing


a parcel of land described in acertificate of title if registration ofthe instrument results in theissuing of one or more certificatesof title and the parcel of landdescribed in each certificate oftitle so issued would consist onlyof any or all of the following:(a) a quarter section;(b) a river lot shown on an officialplan, as defined in the SurveysAct, that is filed or lodged in aland titles office;(c) a lake lot shown on an officialplan, as defined in Surveys Act,that is filed or lodged in a landtitles office;(d) a settlement lot shown on anofficial plan, as defined in theSurvey Act, that filed or lodged ina land titles office;[…]

Readers should note that theword “subdivision” is currently notused in the heading of any officialplan in unsurveyed territory,surveyed under part two of theSurveys Act. River lot and lake lotsurveys of public land within unsur-veyed territory are now regardedonly as official settlement plans.

Current Manual of StandardPractice Requirements WithRespect to the Survey ofPublic LandsIn addition to the above legislatedrequirements, the current require-ments for the survey of public landswithin unsurveyed territory arestipulated within Part D, Section 8of the current Manual of StandardPractice wherein it states:

The survey of public lands- townships,- settlements,- metis settlements,- provincial parks, and- provincial boundaries,requires specific instructions ofthe Director of Surveys officeunder the Surveys Act or theBoundary Surveys Act. Thesurvey of Indian reserves andnational parks will requirespecific instructions from theSurveyor General of Canada.

If engaged in any of these sur-veys, it is considered good prac-tice to involve the above officesearly in the process.

Instructions from the Director ofSurveys Office may include surveyspecifications such as integration tosurvey control, least squares adjust-ment provisions, posting require-ments, line cutting requirements,cautions for provincial forestryprotective areas, specific terms-of-reference required if water bounda-ries are surveyed, and other perti-nent requirements as deemednecessary by the Director of Sur-veys.

ConclusionWhile previously employed at theDirector of Surveys Office, I encoun-tered some plans rejected by theLand Titles Office when practition-ers attempted to register settlementplans in unsurveyed territorywithout involving the Director ofSurveys.

It is important to know that theland tenure system within Albertarequires an official surveys process,under part two of the Surveys Act,to bring crown (public) land into thefreehold regime as an initial step.Subdivision surveys can then becarried out under part three of theSurveys Act after an official plan isconfirmed by the Director of Sur-veys.

Practitioners are reminded thatthis initial process is necessarybefore a subdivision plan can beregistered. Your professional adviceto your client should include mak-ing him aware of this extra process,time and expense prior to commit-ting to a contract to carry out asurvey of public land within unsur-veyed territory in Alberta.

Editor’s Note: Fred Cheng wasDirector of Practice Review untilNovember 8, 2007 but prepared thismessage before leaving the Associa-tion


spr cornerby Fred Cheng, ALS

The purpose of this article is purely educational. Nonames or identifying legal descriptions are included.Opinions expressed herein are those of the author.

Case Study No. 34Survey ControlIntegration—A Tale ofTwo Bearings

AcknowledgementThe author wishes to acknowledgethe practitioner for allowing me towrite this educational article re-garding the subject non-monu-mented subdivision plan.

The author also wishes to ac-knowledge Land Titles Office forpermitting the author to use theregistered plans contained in thisarticle.

BackgroundNon-monumented survey plans,commonly known as delayed post-ing survey plans under Section 47of the Surveys Act was a hot topicfor discussion during the April 2007Annual General Meeting (AGM) inLake Louise.

Several motions relating to non-monumented survey plans werepassed during the AGM requestingreview and/or amendment to partsof the Manual of Standard Practice(MSP) with respect to internalcontrol network, as well as timingrequirements for the filing of Form11.1 Monument Certificate.

This article is inspired by severalpractitioners’ queries relating to thegrid bearing, datum referencing andsurvey control integration require-ments in accordance with theManual of Standard Practice.

In the past, the Director ofSurveys (DOS) Office carried out acomprehensive plan examination onnon-monumented survey plans andwould require the survey controlnetwork to be submitted prior to thesurvey. The DOS or his designatewould run through a computer leastsquares adjustment program toanalyze the strength of the practi-tioners’ proposed internal controlnetwork and to ensure that all

posting requirements are metwithin the provisions of the legisla-tion.

Fundamental PrinciplesWhen a land surveyor performs adelayed posting (non-monumented)subdivision survey affecting aparcel of land, it is the surveyor’sresponsibility to ascertain therelationship of his subdivision withthe existing parcel to the Albertasurvey control system when fullyintegrated. Section 47 of the currentSurveys Act [RSA 2000 Chapter S-26] stipulates non-monumentedsurvey plan as follows:47(1) Notwithstanding anything in

this Act, a surveyor may, with-out placing the monumentsrequired by Section 45(1),submit a plan for registration atthe Land Titles Office or filingat the Metis Settlements LandRegistry if sufficient surveycontrol markers exist in thevicinity of the survey.

(2) Subject to subsection (4), the co-ordinates of the survey controlmarkers and of the monuments,as shown on the plan of survey,determine the boundary linesestablished by the survey andplan.

(3) A surveyor who submits forregistration a plan pursuant tosubsection (1) shall within oneyear from its registration orwithin a longer period of timespecified by the Director,(a) Place the monuments re-quired by Section 45(1) inaccordance with the surveycontrol markers and the co-ordinates shown on the plan,and(b) File with the Registrar proofunder oath, in the form pre-scribed by regulations under theLand Titles Act, of having doneso.

(4) On registration of the formreferred to in subsection (3)(b),the Registrar shall endorse amemorandum on the plan, and

the monuments placed pursuantto subsection (3) determine theboundary lines as though theyhad been placed before theregistration of the plan.

(5) Notwithstanding subsection (3),if the surveyor who submitted aplan pursuant to subsection (1)ceases to be registered as anAlberta Land Surveyor, or forany other reason fails to satisfythe requirements of subsection(3), some other surveyor ap-pointed by the Director maycarry out the requirements ofsubsection (3).

Further, Part D Section 1.2 of theManual of Standard Practice states:

The recognized datum forspatially-referenced data inAlberta is the North AmericanDatum 1983 (NAD’83), usingthe GRS 80/WGS 84 ellipsoid.This datum and related ellip-soid therefore shall be used onall plans of survey registeredin the Land Titles Office, ifplan information relates togrid bearings or grid coordi-nates. The choice of mapprojections must be consistentwith the requirements of theprovincial mapping system.The recommended verticaldatum for spatially referenceddata in Alberta is CVD28.The plan of survey shall clearlyshow the datum of origin usedfor bearings and coordinateson the plan of survey as out-lined below:.1 Unless circumstancesrequire greater accuracy,bearings should be shown tothe nearest 5 seconds of arc.Ties to Survey Control Markersshall reflect the actual angledetermined..2 All plans of survey pursu-ant to Section 47 of the SurveysAct; and Part C Section 5 ofthe Manual of StandardPractice, using grid bearings


or grid coordinates, shall basegrid bearings or grid coordi-nates on NAD’83 and show, inaddition, to other requirementsfor plans, the following:A note in the legend of the planand header for grid coordinatelistings indicating:• the datum used,• the projection used,• the reference meridian,• the combined factor (scale/

elevation).These MSP, Part D, Section 1.2

requirements apply to all integratedsurveys, not just for the non-monumented plans under Section47 of the Surveys Act. Of course, allsurveys done under Section 47 ofthe Surveys Act must be integrated.

The Non-MonumentedSubdivision PlanThe practitioner submitted hisregistered plan for discussionpurposes. The legend of his plandefines his datum and bearingsdefinitions as follows:

Bearings are grid and are derivedfrom registered plan no. (the samesubject registered plan number)

Datum .................................. NAD83Projection ................................. 3TMReference Meridian ....... 114 DegreeCombined scale factor ...... 0.999847

Even though integration ties toAlberta Survey Control Markerswere made and shown on the plan,the above legend notation indicatesthat the grid bearings reference wasgenerated from something otherthan the practitioner’s ties to theASCMs. Simply, the practitionerreferred the origin of his gridbearings to his own plan based onhis own observations.

Further communication with thepractitioner revealed that thepractitioner utilized GPS RTK forthis survey. Integration wasachieved by tying in to a GPS basestation mounted on the roof-top ofhis office building. This GPS basestation observes NAD83 (CSRS)data and broadcast signals to itsremote receivers, hence, making theASCM ties as shown on the plansomewhat misleading.

Figure One is a sanitized copy ofthe practitioner’s registered non-monumented subdivision plan.

The practitioner also revealedthat his own global positioningsystem (GPS) observation was usedto determine the origin of the gridbearings, and the intent was not torotate his observations to fit theAlberta Survey Control network.

Similarly, several practitionersrevealed they would not want to“downgrade their observations” toan “inferior” Alberta Survey Controlnetwork, as their observations aremore accurate and would better suittheir own future survey practice.

Furthermore, the practitionerpointed out the wording within theMSP (Part D, Section 1.2) is some-what ambiguous and thereby raisedthe following concerns:

What is meant by the recognizeddatum for spatially-referenced datain Alberta is the North AmericanDatum 1983 (NAD83), using theGRS 80/WGS 84 ellipsoid?

In terms of datum definition,should one follow the datum defini-tion as: NAD83 (original); NAD83(as observed); or NAD83 (CSRS)?

The province publishes a subset ofASCM values based on NAD83(CSRS); does this imply that adatum definition of NAD83 (CSRS)is to be used?

The QuestionThe above arguments from thepractitioner are all valid. However,the fundamental question is—didthe practitioner fulfill the require-

ments of integration within theManual of Standard Practice?

Let us examine the MSP require-ments as per Part C, Section 5 –Integrated Surveys, wherein itstates:5.1 Every survey a plan of which is

to be registered under the LandTitles Act shall be integratedwith survey control if 2 or moremonuments found or placed bythe survey are each within 1kilometre of any 2 survey controlmarkers.

5.2 For the purpose of Section 5.1,integration with survey controlmeans obtaining sufficientmeasurements from surveycontrol markers into the surveyto permit the derivation of gridbearings and the computation ofa closure starting at a surveycontrol marker and proceedingalong the shortest path throughthe survey to another surveycontrol marker.

5.3 When computing a closureunder Section 5.2, the error ofclosure when compared to thecoordinates of the survey controlmarkers, as confirmed andpublished by the Director ofSurveys, shall not exceed thegreater of:.1 the product of 0.00014 and thedirect distance between the 2survey control markers used forthe closure, or..2 25 millimetres.[…]

5.7 .1 A survey shall not be carriedout under Section 47 of the


Figure One


Additional concerns involvepractitioners who do not runthrough least squares adjustmentfor generating their grid co-ordi-nates in accordance with Part C,Section 5.7.3.2. This would be inconflict with the MSP requirement,as the observational errors are notevenly distributed throughout thenetwork.

The practitioner also suggestedthat roof-top base stations shouldgain ASCM status from the Directorof Surveys office, which in myopinion is a good recommendation.

In conclusion, if you are of theopinion that the MSP is not currentas per today’s technology, I wouldencourage you to write to Counciland get the standards changed.This way, every Alberta LandSurveyor will be working on acommon plane rather than workingin isolation.

Editor’s Note: Fred Cheng wasDirector of Practice Review untilNovember 8, 2007. He prepared thiscase study prior to leaving theAssociation.

Surveys Act unless the survey isrelated to a minimum of twosurvey control markers..2 The density of survey controlmarkers or reference monumentsshall be such that no propertycorner established by the surveyis more than 200 metres fromthe nearest reference monumentor survey control marker..3 When computing the accuracyof the control ties to propertyand reference monuments, theaccuracies shall be determinedby:.3.1 For survey control less than2 kilometres to all property andreference monuments, theaccuracy shall not exceed thegreater of the product of 0.00014and the direct distance betweenthe 2 survey control markersused for the closure, or 25millimetres..3.2 For survey control greaterthan 2 kilometres to all propertycorners and reference monu-ments, the method of leastsquares shall be employed (seePart C Section 1.1) with theminimum standard valueshown in the chart below.Distance(m) ppm>2000 12.5>5000 5.0>10000 2.5>20000 1.5

[…]

In my opinion, the practitionerhas not fulfilled the requirements ofintegration within the Manual ofStandard Practice. The practitioneris simply informing the plan readeraudience that his bearings are gridand are derived from his GPSobservations.

The ArgumentsThe following arguments substanti-ate my opinion that the practitionerhas not met the MSP requirements:• Plan readers are assuming that

the practitioner’s observationshave been properly adjusted andintegrated into the AlbertaSurvey Control network;

• The published Alberta SurveyControl Marker information isofficial, but has in fact not been

used for this plan of survey,making it misleading to planreaders;

• The physical Alberta SurveyControl Markers are the physicallink between the plan (and theGPS observations used to deriveit) and its orientation in the realworld;

• Alberta Survey Control is quali-tatively traceable, which otherpractitioners can use to relatetheir work.

ConclusionAlberta Land Surveyors must useAlberta Survey Control Markers asstipulated by the MSP. We must bemindful that a plan is not just forthe benefit of a single practitioner,but for all other practicing landsurveyors Thus under Section 47,the idea of integration in order toallow other land surveyors toreliably re-create/reproduce whatyou have done is inherent. As aconsequence, this can only beachieved through properly integrat-ing into the Alberta Survey Controlnetwork as per the current MSPrequirements.

In addition, on the issue ofdowngrading one’s “superior” GPSobservation per se, the current MSPonly requires a practitioner toachieve 1:7500 accuracy. Thisequates to a relative precision of133.3 ppm or nominally a thirdorder survey. Certainly, in urbanareas (and rural, for the most part),ASCMs can support this level ofintegration.

Another issue of concern is thatpractitioners may not be clear onthe datum definition. Within theMSP it simply says NAD83 withoutreferencing to it meaning NAD83(original) or NAD83 (CSRS). In myopinion, there are two ways to lookat this issue. First, consider the factthat all ASCMs published on SPINare referenced to NAD83 (original)making this the defacto derivationof NAD83. Second, look at it interms of the practitioner usingeither NAD83 (original) or NAD83(CSRS) as long as he/she clearlystates on the plan of survey whichreference datum was used. The keyis for practitioners to be clear intheir approach.

What’s Hot on the internet?Check out these websites to tellyou what everyone else istalking about.

Google Trendswww.google.com/trends/

hottrends

Fast Company Magazinewww.fastcompany.com/homepage/index.html

Mahalowww.mahalo.com/

Category:Internet_Zeitgeist

TrendHunterwww.trendhunter.com

netnotes


guardpostby Jeff Boutilier, ALS

The opinions expressed in this article arethat of the Practice Review Board memberand not necessarily of the Board.

Dormant Plans

While attending a recentregional meeting of our Association,discussion focused on our Associa-tion’s financial status. A commentcame from one of our membersstating that although we appear tobe having a record number of plansregistered at Land Titles this year,our revenue sources from the sale ofstatutory iron survey posts andmarker posts appears to havedeclined from previous years. Ithought to myself that the Directorof Practice Review must be doing anadmirable job in directing practi-tioners to register their dormantplans. The revenue from all thesemonuments was realized long ago.Obviously any lack of funding is -Fred’s fault!

The issue of “dormant plans” hasbeen written about on severaloccasions in the ALS News, but thepractice reviews seems to suggestthat it is still a common problem. In2004, with the commencement ofthe Phase 3 Systematic PracticeReview (SPR) program, the PracticeReview Board (PRB) was mandatedby Council to have practitionersdeal with their dormant plans.

While performing the in-officevisits (internal reviews), the Direc-tor asks each practitioner if theyhave any such plans, the number ofsuch, and what process is in place tohandle them. During my tenure onthe Board, firms have self-identifiedthat they have anywhere from zeroto several hundred dormant plans.During Board discussion, it becameobvious that some firms are mistak-ing dormant plans with unregis-tered plans.

To re-iterate, for the benefit ofthe membership, the PRB is con-cerned with surveys that do notmeet the requirements of Part C,Section 3.8 of the Manual of Stand-ard Practice, which reads: If astatutory monument has beenestablished but is not shown on aplan registered in the Land Titles

Office, the surveyor must register aplan, called an Establishment ofMonuments plan, within two yearsof the monument establishment.This does not negate Sections 44and 46 of the Act.

A decent job trackingsystem will make it veryeasy to determine whenyou placed the statutoryiron posts and when theplan needs to be registered.

I think this is clear. If I placed astatutory monument two yearsprior to today’s date and have notregistered the plan, it is now “dor-mant.” A decent job tracking systemwill make it very easy to determinewhen you placed the statutory ironposts and when the plan needs to beregistered.

One of the reasons for the exist-ence of dormant plans for theresource sector surveying practicesis having to fulfill the requirementand the facilitation of having the oiloperator sign off on the plan. If thisis the case, the solution is simple—amonument plan can be registeredand, by Murphy’s Law, the “con-sent” form will be in your office thenext week.

Other common sources of dor-mant plans may be attributed to theAlberta Land Surveyor responsiblefor the plan no longer availableeither through retirement, companychanges, or death.

The first item that we swear offto on our affidavit reads “that thesurvey represented by this plan wasmade under my personal supervi-

sion.” When the original ALS is nolonger with the engaged firm, whoshould and can sign the affidavit?Let’s look at the following scenarios.

Scenario OneThe original surveyor has changedcompanies and is still practicing.Any time an ALS leaves one com-pany for another, it is imperativethat all of the land surveyor’sproject files be reviewed prior toleaving. The ALS should identifyany plans left to be completed andagreements must be put in placeregarding who will be responsiblefor the outstanding projects. Inmany instances the original sur-veyor, while employed with a newcompany, will sign the affidavitwhile the permit stamp is that ofhis previous employment. Anothersurveyor employed with the previ-ous practice could sign the plan.However, the onus is on him tothoroughly review the project andfile, and to undertake all profes-sional responsibilities.

Scenario TwoThe original surveyor is now non-practicing. If the ALS has sinceretired, he/she has no professionalauthority to sign the affidavit. If theplan is to be registered, does thecompany have the umbrella author-ity for another ALS to cover theaffidavit? In my opinion, therecould be two options: the survey isre-done, or another surveyor withinthe company reviews the file com-pletely and signs off. As above, allprofessional responsibilities lie withthe signing surveyor. Again, when amember is retiring, all open projectsmust be reviewed prior to leaving.

During Board discussion it became obvious thatsome firms are mistaking dormant plans withunregistered plans.


When applying to the Associationto go on the retired list, you mustexplain how you are going to resolveany outstanding dormant plans.

Scenario ThreeThe original surveyor is deceased.There is no alternative to anothersurveyor signing off on the plan. Anexisting surveyor at the company (ifthere is one available) must register

the plan; that means the survey isre-done or a thorough review of theproject and plan to be performed isleft up to the professional.

A practice review file cannot beclosed if the firm has an outstand-ing dormant plan issue. Somepractitioners are requested toprovide a date by which the planswill be registered and then provideproof to the Director when the planis registered. The Board has alsolooked if the practice has a process

When applying to the Association to go on the retired list,you must explain how you are going to resolve anyoutstanding dormant plans.

in place and whether the practicehas a handle on reducing thenumber of dormant plans withinany given practice.

In closing, although not a dor-mant plan issue, another thoughtcomes to mind. If an error or omis-sion is discovered on a registeredplan from one of the above listedscenarios, how will they be dealtwith? It is advisable for practition-ers to make similar arrangementswith their previous practice prior todeparture (or even at the com-mencement of their new employ-ment) as to who is responsible andhow any plan corrections will bedealt with.


pdc cornerby Marty Robinson, ALS

The Professional Develop-ment Committee (PDC) has had abusy year as usual and all signspoint to even busier years to come.Over the past few years, the PDChas been involved in organizingseveral seminars as well as organiz-ing speakers for the three regionalmeetings held in Calgary, Edmon-ton and Grande Prairie. A fourthregional meeting location has alsobeen added. Medicine Hat will nowhold its own regional meeting.

As usual, the PDC annuallypresents three of the wildly popularGetting It Right seminars; one inCalgary, one in Edmonton and athird which rotates through RedDeer, Grande Prairie, Lloydminsterand now Medicine Hat. I would liketo thank the recently appointedGetting It Right binder coordinator,Greg Hebb, for the great deal ofwork he has done to update theGetting It Right binders and createthe new plans to be used during theseminar. Thank you Greg for allyour work. It is appreciated.

Each Getting It Right seminaraccommodates 30 people and al-ways fills up quickly. The number oftimes the PDC can present thisseminar is limited by the numberand availability of the memberstrained to present it. Fortunately, a“train the trainer” seminar tookplace at the end of November. Thisthree-day seminar, presented by theoriginal consultant that helped thePDC develop the Getting It Rightseminar, teaches members toconfidently present the materialcompiled in the seminar package.This seminar will add seven morepresenters to the membership,ready to not only assist in theGetting It Right Seminar, but toalso help with other PDC seminars,like the recently developed FieldNotes seminar, which has beenpresented twice with a good deal ofsuccess.

The 2008 AGM will include aRisk Management seminar featur-ing some interesting and varied

topics. Dr. Rob Radovanovic, ALSwill be presenting a GPS SurveyPractice—Prevention of Errorssession that must be seen.

Unfortunately, not all of ourseminar ideas are successful. ThisSeptember we attempted to presenta safety seminar, which focused onkey safety issues in the realm ofsurveying. The enrollment for theseminar was too low to warrant theseminar to take place, so we arehoping the scheduled seminar onsafety scheduled for November 2008will be able to catch the attention ofmore members. The idea behindthis safety seminar is to help theproject managers and safety officersfor all different sizes of surveycompanies to develop safe workpolicies for their companies andemployees.

The PDC is now presenting twoExam Prep seminars annually; onebefore the spring exams and onebefore the fall exams. The PDC hasstarted a bank of questions topresent to articling pupils andaffiliate members. The one-dayseminar involves the presentersassisting students in workingthrough the questions and provid-ing solutions. It is always difficultto acquire enough questions on avariety of survey topics. That is whythe PDC is making a request to allprincipals to provide an exam prepquestion and solution to be added tothe PDC question bank. This willaid in the students learning andwill definitely help the volunteerswho give up a Saturday to help thestudents prepare for their exams.

The role of the PDC may bechanging. With rumbles aboutmandatory professional develop-ment and the recent signing of the

Memorandum of Understanding onDeveloping National DistanceLearning Opportunities for Cana-dian Land Surveyors, professionaldevelopment is taking on a wholenew importance. The CCLS hasagreed, in principle, to develop adistance learning course for indi-viduals attempting to obtain theirCBEPS certification. As a memberassociation, the ALSA will takesome responsibility in helpingdevelop this distance learningproject. This makes it an opportunetime for the ALSA to begin its ownform of distance learning. The PDCnow has two “canned” presenta-tions, the Getting It Right seminarand the Field Notes seminar, whichwould be perfect to convert intosome form of a distance learningpresentation.

The aging membership of theAssociation means that a great dealof survey knowledge may soon beretiring from the Association,making it even more important tosomehow capture the knowledgeand experience from those membersbefore it is lost forever. The PDC islooking into ways to record andmake seminar materials availablefor all the members who could notattend the presentation. The meth-ods we are looking into includevideo, audio recordings, power pointpresentations and interactive CDs.It is important that professionaldevelopment keeps up with thetimes and is available to the entiremembership. With the signing ofthe TILMA Mutual RecognitionDocument, the Agreement onInternal Trade and the MutualRecognition Agreement in 2001, weneed to make information forsurveying in Alberta readily avail-

Please do not hesitate to contact the PDC throughthe Association office with any ideas you have onour role or a seminar suggestion and please volunteerfor a committee.


able to affiliate members through-out the country.

Finally, the PDC has been givenan additional task from Council thisyear. After the membership gave itssupport to Dr. Radovanovic’s re-quest to “investigate what role aprofessional educational consultantcould provide the ProfessionalDevelopment Committee,” the PDChas been charged with the task ofdeveloping ideas and areas where aconsultant could be utilized to assistthe association with professionaldevelopment. As previously men-tioned, the PDC already utilizes a

consultant for training presentersfor the Getting It Right seminar,but we will be looking into how aconsultant could help develop moreseminars and assist our presentersto be more dynamic and betterprepared. We are hoping to havesome ideas to present to Councilshortly, but could always use inputfrom the membership on this or anymatters pertaining to professionaldevelopment. Please do not hesitateto contact the PDC through theAssociation office with any ideasyou have on our role or a seminarsuggestion and please volunteer for

...the PDC...could always use input from themembership on this or any matters pertaining toprofessional development.

a committee. Besides being volun-teered to write the occasional articlefor ALS News the experience isdefinitely rewarding.

Seminars

Getting It RightMarch 6-7, 2008—LethbridgeMarch 20-21, 2008—Calgary

Exam PrepMarch 22, 2008

Risk ManagementApril 24, 2008—Lake Louise

For more seminar information, visitwww.alsa.ab.ca/events.htm


public relationsby Bruce Drake, ALS

Although this is my secondterm serving on the Public Rela-tions Committee, this is my firstopportunity to submit an article.The typical first article for ALSNews usually involves phrases like“Webster’s dictionary defines….,” or“On the advice of Brian Munday...,”or “past issues of ALS News havedealt with....” Not being one to bucka successful trend, I am choosingoption three.

The past two years of ALS NewsPublic Relations Committee articleshave dealt with getting the messageout. Issues such as recruiting newmembers to our profession, promot-ing our profession and our profes-sional image to the public, andaddressing challenges to the futureof our profession have been raisedand discussed by past and currentCommittee members. These topics,and the discussions they generate,demonstrate our members’ broadcommitment to getting our messageout.

I do worry, however, that some-times we focus so much on gettingthe message out that we forget tolet messages come back in. I alwaysreflect on this whenever I open ourManual of Standard Practice, andre-read the Code of Ethics, espe-cially Clause 1 (with commentary):“An Alberta Land Surveyor shallserve society, his clientele and hisprofession with the ultimate objec-tive of contributing to the knowledgeof land, to the better management ofland and to the preservation ofpeaceful and lawful enjoyment ofland.• This public interest must begreater than the interest of anyindividual client of the AlbertaLand Surveyor….”

I have often commented toemployees that when you read thisclause, society is listed beforeclientele. What does this mean indaily practice? Whose role is it toensure that this service to society isbeing met? What role, if any, doesour administrative and technical

staff play in this? Does serving thepublic interest always mean carry-ing out a survey, or is there some-thing else we can do? Is it possiblethat the best way to serve the publicis to sometimes do nothing?

In our daily practice, what if wespent less time promoting and moretime listening? One of the mostinfluential books I have ever read,and re-read, is How to Win Friendsand Influence People by DaleCarnegie. Written in 1936, the bookcontains many ideas that are stillvalid today. The core of the book’smessage involves avoiding conflict,finding common ground, and resolv-ing issues before they escalate intointractable situations. Valuabletools for a professional that is oftencalled to stand between two land-owners!

We have all received calls fromlandowners, or other members ofthe public with questions regardingsurveys, survey crews, or boundaryissues. When I get these calls, I tryto understand not only the issuebeing presented by the caller butthe issue behind the call. Thisinvolves listening, asking questions,and most importantly, relating tothe caller. Has one of our crews, inthe performance of its work, failedto show courtesy and respect to thepublic, or were they just trying to dotheir job as quickly as possible? Hasone of our administrative staff beenso convinced the paperwork wascorrect, that they came across asabrupt and harsh? Sometimes, weget calls because the caller is frus-trated and needs someone to listento their frustrations. An examplewill help illustrate the point.

I was with a junior crew, review-ing evidence for a boundary surveyof a quarter section. We parked ourtrucks off of a main road in anapproach, about 75 metres from aquarter pin to be found. While

reviewing plans, a water truckpulled up and asked if we couldmove a bit so he could deliver waterto a residence. We moved our trucksto the sides of the approach, into afield, as there was high traffic onthe road, and no safe place to parkon the shoulder. My party chief andI found the posts we were lookingfor, and were discussing whatadditional evidence was needed. Ilooked up to see a gentleman walk-ing (stomping might be a betterdescriptor) towards us, obviously ina high state of agitation. He askedwho was in charge, and when I tookresponsibility, he proceeded tolaunch into a tirade about how sickand tired he was having his drive-way used to store equipment,change diapers, do drugs and, ingeneral, ruin his life. This was hisday to defend his property againstall invaders, and we were hisenemy. I did the only thing possiblein the situation. I listened. He toldme he was tired of having hisdriveway blocked. I agreed, andsaid that was why I had moved outof the way of his water truck. Hetold me how he had single-handedlyshut down the construction projecton the other side of the road. Iagreed that I didn’t need my projectshut down. He complained thatthere was so much traffic on theadjoining road, that he felt safetywas an issue. I agreed that safetywas one of my primary concerns. Atthis point I asked, based upon hislocal knowledge, where did he thinka safe place would be to park mytrucks? Now that he had his chanceto vent, he told me he felt that thebest place to park while near hisproperty was exactly where we wereparked. I thanked him for his help,and he went away happy in theknowledge that he had put me inmy place, and was gracious enough

I try to understand not only the issue being presented bythe caller, but the issue behind the call.


to allow me to continue doingexactly what I was doing anyway.

In preparing this example, Inoticed that I had used ten of theTwelve Ways to Win People to YourWay of Thinking outlined inCarnegie’s book. Not too bad for 71year-old advice. And all we had todo was listen, see his point, and goon about our business.

Our service to the public as aself-governing profession is atremendous responsibility. Ourtraining, skills and knowledgeshould be used for the public.Sometimes, all the public needs isan audience. We should make surethat is part of what we do. This isnot to say the public is always right.

If they were, we wouldn’t beneeded. Rather, the public has theright to an opinion.

As we approach the end of 2007,we should ensure that we remem-ber not only who we work for, butwho we serve. We should work withour technical staff, who are oftenthe public’s first contact on a surveyproject, and make sure that ourstaff is supporting our profession’sefforts in getting the message outby not talking when listening isrequired.

From my family, to all of yours, Iwant to wish everyone a MerryChristmas, and a safe and prosper-ous New Year.

Regional Meetings

EdmontonJanuary 30, 2008

April 9, 2008

CalgaryJanuary 31, 2008

April 8, 2008

Grande PrairieFebruary 5, 2008April 3, 2008



book reviewby Ken Allred, ALS

The Curious Life of RobertHooke — The Man WhoMeasured Londonby Lisa Jardine

great fire but have never seen areference to anyone named Crook orCrooke. Hence I began to doubt theauthenticity of the story in TheCanadian Surveyor. Lisa Jardine’sbook on Dr. Hooke puts my suspi-cions to rest—Crooke is a myth.

Robert Hooke...was indeedthe man who measuredLondon after the great fireof 1666...

Robert Hooke, however, is farfrom a myth. He was indeed theman who measured London afterthe great fire of 1666, and a manwho created a very successfulsurvey practice as a result of thefire. His practice also extended intoarchitecture as the managingpartner with Sir ChristopherWren—the architect of St. Paul’sCathedral in London as well asmany other famous buildings.Hooke is credited with designingthe dome of St. Paul’s Cathedral.Hooke also designed a number offamous structures including theBedlam Hospital and the RoyalCollege of Physicians. The onlysurviving structure of significanceis the Willen Church in Luttonalthough he is credited with doingsome work on the Greenwich Ob-servatory.

Dr. Robert Hooke was not prima-rily a surveyor but rather was ateacher of mathematics and abrilliant physicist at GreshamCollege in London. He was an avidinventor and was one of the found-

ers and a lifetime curator of theRoyal Society, a society of notablephilosophers, inventors and other15th century notables including SirIsaac Newton, Sir Chrisopher Wren,and Edmund Halley.

Hooke was a bit of a cantanker-ous old bachelor who seems to havebeen on the leading edge of manynew inventions and mathematicaldiscoveries that were perfected byothers for which Hooke receivedlittle or no credit, which added tohis eccentricity. As a leadingmathematican and philosopher,Hooke theorized that the inversesquare law of gravitational attrac-tion created an elliptical orbit of theplanets around the sun in 1676.This theory was accredited toNewton as documented in hisPrincipia published in 1686.

Hooke was himself a greatscientist in his own right havinginvented telescopes and micro-scopes and having developed vari-ous pendulum and spring clocks fordetermination of longitude at sea.His own Micrographia was a workof art with many fine detaileddrawings of various scientificobservations including a full pageimage of a flea as viewed under oneof his microscopes. His endeavorsreached into the fields of as-tronomy, chemistry, botany andmedicine. He is credited withintroducing the theory of elasticitywhich led him to design manyspring clocks.

Lisa Jardine’s biography ofHooke tells an interesting, no holdsbarred story of Hooke, empathizingwith his plight in his various dis-putes for acclaim but at the sametime recognizing the faults inHooke’s personality which lost himboth battles for fame and the re-spect of loyal friends.

Hooke died at the age of 67without having finalized his will,thus dying intestate with a largeestate and many prized inventionsand other possessions.

By Hook or by CrookThe great fire in London, England,in 1666 destroyed not only theancient land marks but all evidenceof their former location. The onlyevidence of their former location wasthe memory of men still living andthe measurements from objectswhose location was known. A manby the name of Crooke had beensurveying so long in the city that hewas supposed to know every cornerin it. After the fire, the city councilappointed as city surveyor a man bythe name of Robert Hooke who wasesteemed the most profound math-ematician and philosophical me-chanic of his time. It is said that thewonderful sagacity, almost intui-tion, he showed in deducing correctconclusions from meager premiseshas never before nor since beenequalled.

It was generally conceded that thelocation of any old corner could becorrectly located by the memory ofCrooke or the reasoning of Hooke.That is, either by Hooke or byCrooke.” Hence the expression wehear today. But in no case did theyattempt to locate a corner withoutgood evidence that it was where theold corner stood before the fire.

THE CANADIAN SURVEYOR,VOLUME 32. NO. 2. P.269

Ever since I read the above articlein The Canadian Surveyor, I havebeen curious about Dr. Hooke andthe survey of London after the greatfire of 1666. Having researchedwhatever information was avail-able, I have found considerableinformation about Robert Hooke asthe surveyor of London after the


safety sense

Walking Through the Workers Compensation Board (WCB AB)These notes have been prepared forthe Alberta Land Surveyors’ Asso-ciation. The information has beencollected from consultation with thestaff and various WCB publications,including the WCB Alberta WorkersHandbook and the WCB partners ininjury reduction. This article willdeal with industry code # 86401,which relates to surveying, land/general.

The chart refers to a made upsurvey company called “NewCo.Geomatics” which, in this example,is a WCB member, has 100 employ-ees on staff and has a yearly payrollof approximately 5.5 million dollars.

The Corporation(No Fault Insurance)The WCB (Alberta) is a not-for-profit mutual insurance corporationfunded entirely by its employers. Itprovides cost-effective workplaceliability and disability insurance tomore then 1.7 million workers and117,000 companies.

The Workers Compensation Actis based upon the ‘Meredith Princi-ple’ (1913). Employers agreed tofund the program and in exchange,workers would give up the right tosue their company for the impact ofwork-related injuries.

Are All Companies Covered?Not all companies are covered bythe WCB. Some industries do notrequire coverage or have foundother options. More information onthis area can be obtained by con-tacting the WCB directly.

Employer PremiumRate StatementEmployer premium rate statementsare provided during the October/November of each year for the newyear and beyond (ie. 2008).

From the attached sample it canbe seen that for 2007, the estab-lished industry rate for code #86401

Performance Based Pricing — Impact of InjuriesAccount: 1000 NewCo. GeomaticsIndustry: 86401 SURVEYING, LAND/GENERAL

Rate Year 2006 - All Costs Transacted to November 20, 2006

Premium Ranges

$140,000

$120,000

$100,000

$80,000

$60,000

$40,000

$20,000

$0

$128,092

$99,689

$28,403

$42,833

$71,286

$95,700

$2.30Max PP

Surcharge

$0.51Max ER+PIR

Discount

$0.77Max ERDiscount

$1.28Industry

Rate

$1.72YourRate

$1.79Max ER

Surcharge

Max PP Max ER Industry Max ER Max ER+PIRSurcharge Surcharge Your Rate Rate Discount Discount

RateScenario $2.30 $1.79 $1.72 $1.28 $0.77 $0.51

Percent ofAdjustment 80.00% 40.00% 34.55% 0.00% -40.00% -60.00%

PremiumTotal $128,091.60 $99,688.68 $95,790.24 $71,285.76 $42,882.84 $28,402.92

Claim CostsScenarios $91,673.91 $63,466.56 $59,631.14 $35,259.20 $7,051.84 N/A*

Max PP Surcharge Represents maximum experience rating adjustment percentage pluspoor performance percentage applied to industry rate.

Max ER Surcharge Represents maximum experience rating adjustment percentageapplied to industry rate.

Industry Rate Represents industry rate.Your Stats Represents your company’s rate.Max ER Discount Represents minimum experience rating adjustment percentage

applied to industry rate.Max ER+PIR Discount Represents minimum experience rating adjustment percentage

partners in injury reduction percentage discount applied to industryrate.

*There are many different claims costs scenarios that would achievea PIR discount; therefore, calculating claims costs for PIR is notapplicable.

by Alex Hittel, ALS


was $1.24 per hundred dollars ofpayroll.

It should be noted that “NewCo.Geomatics” had claim costs of$48,869.85, while the industryaverage costs were only $39,196.22.Hence the employer receives a rateadjustment of 12.34% surcharge to$1.39 per hundred dollars of pay-roll, for an added premium costs of$8,250.00.

The Dreaded SurchargeOnce a company becomes saddledwith a surcharge, it will take con-siderable effort to clear it from itsrecords. Although surchargedemployers can eliminate the sur-charge quickly if they are at theindustry rate the following years,this often does not happen if theemployer continues to have inci-dents each year. Even when acompany has been recognized for itsexceptional performance in Healthand Safety, the surcharge cancontinue to stain its efforts formany years. Unfortunately, theoriginal intent of the surcharge hasbecome lost and is now used as agrading system by our clients.Surcharges and discounts arefeatures of the WCB’s performance-based pricing system that is aimedat achieving a balance betweencollective liability and individualemployer accountability. The em-ployer safety and labour committeessupport the concept of a perform-ance based pricing system.

Injury ReportingBoth Time-Lost (TL) and No

Time-Lost (NTL) injuries need to bereported to the WCB within 72hours of the incident. The WCBforms are provided in the workershandbook (January 2007). A NTLmay re-appear in one or two yearsas a TL and, therefore, reporting isrequired. The TL accident will bereflected in your WCB claim sum-mary, report and will remaincharged against you for a minimumperiod of three years.

Partner in Injury Reduction (PIR)The PIR program was originallydeveloped by the WCB AB andadministered by the WCB AB as afinancial incentive program toencourage the development and

maintenance of effective safetymanagement and disability man-agement systems to reduce thehuman and financial costs ofworkplace injuries. Enrollment inPIR is voluntary and relies on a“partnership” and combined effortsbetween the WCB AB. EmploymentImmigration and Industry, industrypartners safety associations, em-ployers and labour groups.

PIR employers who are regis-tered for PIR and have a valid CORand are in compliance with WCBAB and Occupational Health andSafety Legislation are eligible toreceive a minimum incentive of 5%of industry-rated premium regard-less of their claim cost performance.These employers can achieve up toa 20% total incentive depending ontheir claim cost performance underthe Improving Your Performanceand/or Maintaining Industry Lead-ership.

Modified Work ProgramsModified work programs that meetthe intent of WCB AB’s guidelinesand conditions are well accepted bythe medical community, employerassociations, labour groups andlarge numbers of employers andworkers.

For work to be considered suit-able for modified employment, thefollowing conditions must be met:• A certified doctor provided

clearance for modified work andthe modified work meets theworker’s restrictions.

• The modified work keeps theworker active and involved in theworkplace.

• The modified work safely chal-lenges the worker’s physicalabilities.

• The modified work is meaningfuland productive to the employer’soperations.

• The work does not create finan-cial hardship for the worker

Industry SynopsisOne of the problems with ourindustry is that they do not do agood job of analyzing injuries.Fortunately, the WCB provides thisinformation. The survey industry istrying to further assess the hazardsassociated with ATVs, chainsaws,and trucks with ramps for loading/

unloading as well as a large numberof injuries due to trips, slips andfalls.

“NewCo. Geomatics”Premium RangeAs stated earlier, if we refer to afictitious company like “NewCo.Geomatics” which has a payroll ofapproximately 5.5 million dollarsand a surcharge of 34.5%, then wecan quickly see why it is importantto have a low incident rate. Theperformance based pricing chart onimpact of injuries, shows that“NewCo. Geomatics” is leavingseveral thousand dollars per yearon the table. Since a three-yearrollover is used by the WCB, itbecomes a challenge to obtain asuitable pass mark on the compa-ny’s premium rate.

Type of AccidentWCB provides an excellent industrysynopsis of the type of injuries thatoccur in our area #86401. Backinjuries seem to occur more fre-quently than injuries to any otherbody part. Many companies arereducing the number of back injuryproblems by educating their fieldemployees through training pro-grams on a yearly basis of how tobest avoid these incidents. Forexample, if we were to use the samegolf rules whereby we do warm-upexcercises before we start the chainsaw, work-related back injuriescould likely be reduced.

ConclusionWCB supplies an important serviceat an extremely reasonable cost andprovides peace of mind to both theemployer and the injured person.The WCB and employer need towork together to get their employeeback to work as quickly and safelyas possible. At a projected rate of$1.30 per hundred dollars per yearof insurable earnings for the year2008, it is a most desirable andaffordable protection. WCB hasdeveloped many tools that can behelpful in reducing injury. It isevident that management is sup-porting a number of tools such asPIR and COR to make safety pro-


DEFINITIONS

Lost Time Injury (LTO) — Lost time injuries include fatalities,permanent total disabilities, permanent partial disabilities andlost workday cases resulting from work-related injuries. A losttime injury is any work-related injury that renders the injuredperson temporarily unable to perform any regular job orrestricted work activity on any normally scheduled workdayafter the day on which the injury occurred.

Medical Treatment Case (MTC) — A medical treatment case isany injury that involves neither lost workdays nor restrictedworkdays but which requires treatment by a physician or othermedical professional. Medical treatment does not include firstaid treatment (one-time treatment and subsequent observationof minor scratches, cuts, burns, splinters, and so forth, which donot ordinarily require medical care) even though provided by aphysician or other registered professional medical personnel.

Restricted Work Case (RWC) — Restricted work activity occurswhen the employee, because of the job-related injury or illness, isphysically or mentally unable to perform all or any part of his orher normal assignment during all or any part of the normalworkdya or shift.

First Aid Case (FA) — Any one-time treatment and subsequentobservation of minor scratches, cuts, burns, splinters, and soforth, which do not ordinarily require medical care by a physi-cian. Such treatment and observation are considered first aideven though provided by a physician or registered professionalmedical personnel.

Near Miss (NM) — Any occurrence which did not result in injury/damage or loss but could have under slightly different circum-stances. The situation warrantes investigation and passingalong to other crews/people so that they can learn from it andprevent other similar incidents.

Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate (LTIF) — The lost time injuryfrequency measures the number of lost time injuries in theexposure period as a percentage of the workforce. It is calculatedby multiplying the number of lost time injuries (LTI) by 200,000and dividing by the exposure hours worke during the period. 100workers work approximately 200,000 hours in one year.

LTIF = # of LTIs x 200,000 Exposure Hours

Proactive Effort Index Rate (PEIR) — The Proactive Effort IndexRate (PEIR) is our aggregate measure of proactive workforceengagement in HSE processes. Proactive Efforts may be definedas “Discretionary upstream activities which are performed byline operations in their effort to pan, prepare and executeoperations safely and in an environmentally sound manner.”This aggregate measure includes but is not limited to activitiessuch as work observations, Job Safety Analysis and safetymeetings and is calculated by multiplying the number of effortsby 1000 and dividing by the exposure hours worked during theperiod.

PEIR = # of Proactive Effort x 1000Exposure Hours

Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate (TRIF) — The totalrecordable injury frequency measures the number of recordableinjuries in the exposure period as a percentage of the workforce.It is calculated by multiplying the number of recordable injuries(fatalities, LTI, RWC & MA) by 200,000 and dividing by theexposure hours worked during the period. 100 workers workapproximately 200,000 hours in one year.

TRIF = (Fatalities + LTI + RWC + MA) x 200,000 Exposure Hours

OCTOBER 2006 WASO HSE REPORT

grams work better. Despite this, in my opinion, an areathat could be improved in terms of the employer is therather harsh three-year rollover period and the associ-ated surcharges.



assmt notesby Rob Cream, CST — Vice President, ASSMT

Some Musings from myPen (or keyboard) . . . .

The other day, I was explain-ing a few basics of “the old methods”to a young party chief, and it oc-curred to me that, collectively, weare in danger of forever losing amassive amount of EXPERIENCE- BASED KNOWLEDGE as olderland surveyors and party chiefsmove into the office or retire. I’msure that this has happened before,but that doesn’t mean we shouldaccept this loss as inevitable.

Technology changes, methodschange, but the ancient art of“super sleuthing” requires a knowl-edge of “how it was done then.” Youcan’t figure out how something wasdone wrong, or even if it is wrong, ifyou don’t know how it would havebeen done right. Of course “supersleuthing” isn’t the only use for anunderstanding of “the old methods.”Knowledge of “how it was done”leads directly to an understandingof “why we do it this way now.” Werisk a generation of field staff, fromtechnician and technologist to ALS,who have no understanding ofsimple things like an offset line,plumbing a back sight, measuring adistance with a plumb bob andchain, transferring an inaccessiblepoint with a plumb bob and tape,and so on.

Does it matter? Of course itmatters. No matter how young orold you are, you have some under-standing of what came before you,and how, and that knowledge hashelped your decisions countlesstimes, whether you were aware of itor not. So, what’s different now? Isthis more of the “technology ischanging too fast” whine? No. Noit’s not. What has changed is theamount of time spent in the fieldgaining experience. Back in the day,we all spent more than a couple ofmonths gaining experience,wouldn’t you say? Not so now.“College knowledge” is a great thingbut it is not a substitute for experi-

ence. The two complement eachother, or at least, they are supposedto. Lately, our hot economy isleaving less time for that “experi-ence training.” Someone fresh out ofschool used to spend quite a whilewith an experienced field person,learning as he went. Perhaps theremight be a bit of a power struggleas the two decided who was theboss, but that was part of thetraining too. The end result was aparty chief with some experience—some “field smarts.” You can’t teachcommon sense, but you can hopesome of it will rub off if there isenough exposure to it.

Where could the present stylelead us? How about this scenario:an inexperienced party chief usesthe fantastic accuracy of his newGPS to tie in the iron posts for arural subdivision. Some of themeasurements conflict with the oldplans, but they “weren’t very accu-rate” back then, so this warning flagis ignored. The subdivision isposted, plan drafted and registered.What if several of the “iron posts”tied were actually old anchor guys?What if a couple of the iron postswere under a fence, so the partychief just held the pole “as plumb aspossible?” “Well,” you say, “youdon’t need much experience to tellthe difference between an anchorguy and an iron post. A “little offplumb” is no big deal. Wrong. Youneed more than a little experience,especially if the posts are buried, or,it’s cold outside, or … <insertexcuse here>. Meanwhile, the ALS(you) has (potentially) a big mess tofix, depending on how long it took tofind out about this blunder.

A party chief with some experi-ence would have been able toestimate which method was used todo the original survey, what likely

error tolerances to expect in thatsurvey, would know whether he hadfound an iron post, would know theimportance of keeping his poleplumb, would know how to offset aniron post under a fence, and, what’smore, he would know how to do allthese things without making aphone call, and without false confi-dence!

Don’t get me wrong.* I havesympathy. Our newest party chiefsare in a tough spot. We want themto run off and do everything, be-cause they’ve been to school and,therefore, are supposed to know allabout this “new stuff,” right? Well,understanding vectors, and know-ing how to push a button are impor-tant, but so is experience, which wedeny them. I can certainly under-stand why some party chiefs freezeup. The fear of making the wrongdecision leads to the fear of makingany decision. Hardly the source ofheady profits, is it? Here’s a quotesome colleagues and I have beenkicking around lately: “Not mak-ing a decision is the wrongdecision.” I think I would ratherhave someone make a bad decision,than no decision. A bad decision (insurveying) can usually be fixed. Anon-decision has no chance ofsuccess, and teaches no lessonsalong the way.

ASSMT continues to certifytechnicians and technologiststhrough their Panel of Examinersand Certification Committee. Thesecommittees consist of representa-tives from the ALSA and ASSMT.Upon certification, individuals arecertified at different levels of tech-nician or technologist in their fieldsof expertise based on level of educa-tion and work EXPERIENCE.

“College knowledge” is a great thing but it is not asubstitute for experience. The two complement eachother, or at least, they are supposed to.


They are encouraged to use the CSTdesignation after their name as ameans of identification. Althoughthe ALSA is involved and acknowl-edges certification through ASSMT,many practitioners do not recognizeCST in the hiring or recognitionprocess of their practice. Clarifyingthe role of the technician/technolo-gist is the first step to recognition.

Wayne Latam, CST, in his articlein the last issue of ALS News,described how a young graduatewith a degree in geomatics engi-neering would start his articlingperiod, and as part of that processhe would be required to spend timein the field training to be a tech-

nologist (party chief). There are alsotechnologists (like myself) who aretaking exams so that they canbecome professionals. The lines (insome ways) are blurring betweenthe professional and the technician/technologist. Only an ALS candetermine a boundary, but there isa lot of other work that we do thatis not so “professional dependant.”That is why the recent (and ongo-ing) talks between the ALSA andASSMT are so important.

ASSMT’s mission is “to promotethe knowledge, skill and proficiencyof technicians and technologistsinvolved in the field of surveyingand mapping.” Although ASSMT no

longer develops or runs its owncourses, we encourage our membersto attend ALSA courses, and con-tinue an open dialogue with thevarious colleges in the province,encouraging our members to attendcourses offered through those too.

To return to the point I startedwith, what can we do to avoid losingthis experience-based knowledge? Ithink this would be a great projectfor a combined ASSMT/ALSAProfessional Development Commit-tee—to produce (in some fashion)bite-sized morsels describing “oldmethods,” complete with anecdotes,jokes and basically, anything tokeep it from becoming too dry.

* For those keeping track, this is theonly musical quote in this article.For me, that’s pretty good.

Only an ALS can determine a boundary, but thereis a lot of other work that we do that is not so“professional dependant.”


a moment of silence

Walter E. Bright, ALS, SLSAugust 2,1918 to July 4, 2007W.E. (Skinny) Bright was born in Vantage,Saskatchewan in 1918 and passed awaypeacefully on Wednesday July 4, 2007, atVictoria BC. A "celebration of life" was heldon July 25, 2007 at the Trafalgar/Pro PatriaBranch No. 292 of the Royal Canadian Legionat Victoria, BC. The ceremony included atribute located at his favourite bar stool.Beside an earlier photograph was placed aglass of beer and a ticket for the pendingmeat draw (you only need one to win).

The story goes that Wally was ofslight build as a youngster. Hisfather, mother and two brothers allcalled him 'Skinny'—a name thatlasted throughout his lifetime. Aftercompleting high school at Assini-boia, Saskatchewan, Skinny enteredthe Faculty of Engineering at theUniversity of Saskatchewan in1936. His summers were spentsurveying rights-of-way for irriga-tion canals with the PFRA. Withthe advent of the Second WorldWar, Skinny left university andstarted full-time employment as ajunior surveyor for the DominionDepartment of Transport laying outearthworks, underground drainsand runways for airfields. In 1942,he enlisted with the Royal Cana-dian Engineers and retired with therank of Warden Officer 2nd Class in1954.

Jean and Walter were married inChilliwack, BC, on December 27th,1946 while Skinny was still in theCanadian Army. Robert JohnBright was born on January 29,1948 and Lucile Ann Bright wasborn three years later on December17, 1951. Then Skinny and familywere transferred to Calgary whereKaren Lynn Bright was born onJanuary 5, 1955, almost at the sametime a notice of transfer to Ger-many came which resulted inSkinny's decision to leave the Army.

Soon after, Skinny enteredprivate practice with the firm ofStrong, Lamb & Nelson in Calgary.

The Brights purchased a home inCalgary and then decided to build anew house at 43 Winsdor CrescentSW. They moved into the new housejust before Christmas in 1959,where Skinny lived until his moveto Victoria. Jean Bright passedaway on November 15th, 1980.Skinny married Elaine four yearslater in Honolulu, Hawaii.

After an articling period of threeyears, under the guidance of JohnA. Lamb, he was commissioned asan Alberta Land Surveyor onNovember 15, 1957 (Registration#235). He obtain his commission asa Saskatchewan Land Surveyor thefollowing year. He was appointedCalgary branch manager on April27, 1974 and was involved in almostall facets of Strong, Lamb & Nelsonuntil his retirement in 1976.

Skinny's contributions to theAlberta Land Surveyors' Associa-tion were many. He served onCouncil from 1961 to 1966 and aspresident in 1965. He will always beknown as the one who kept thoseAGMs on track as the undisputed'parliamentarian' with a number of'sidebars' like the singing of 'O LordIt's Hard To Be Humble' during oneof the debates. Skinny's 25th anni-versary as a member was markedby the publication in ALS News of“The Mechanical Surveyor.” Skinnywas recognized for his outstandingservice with the presentation of theProfessional Recognition Award in1983.

He was a member of the ShrinersClub of Calgary (Al Azhar) andplayed the glockenspiel in themarching band with great pride. Healso played the tenor and alto sax,but his favourite had to be theclarinet which he played until hewas hospitalized in May 2007. Hepassed that love of music onto hisonly grandchild Linda Jean Pic(Karen's daughter), who also lovesto play the tenor and alto sax thatgrandpa gave her. She has playedthem in a jazz band for years. Lindawas born in Virden, MB on April1st, 1983 (Good Friday), so she isreferred to by the family as the‘Holy Fool.’ She earned her Bach-elor of Science Degree in physicalgeography from the University ofManitoba and continues her studiestowards a Masters in Environmen-tal Studies.

Skinny loved the outdoors andevery weekend from May throughOctober, the family would pack upthe camper and head off to themountains or wherever the car waspointed. Skinny's favourite spot wasin Banff at a campground on the oldhighway called Protection Moun-tain. Skinny, with children in hand,would walk all the trails and pathsin the area, never thinking of takingthe sky trams when available.While Jean took the tram, he wouldexplain that it takes away from thenature of the trip. He was famousfor his Grey Cup parties and thespecial spaghetti he made for hisguests. There was also the carrotpudding—never to be duplicated—that he would make at Christmas.Later, in Victoria, he perfected theart of brewing his own barleysandwich.

Skinny was loved as a husbandand father, respected as a landsurveyor, an accomplished musi-cian, a mentor and a devoted friendto many who enjoyed his keen anddry sense of humour. He had theinsight to a simple solution to mostsituations and always enjoyed a


pint of beer with his friends. Notribute to Skinny would be completewithout at least repeating a few ofhis parables and stories including:“hangovers, like sunburns are self-inflicted and therefore are noteligible for sick pay” and “don'tdrink until quitting time—but it'salways quitting time somewhere”(Dave Edwards).

At a get-together at Skinny andJean's with a number of party chiefsand with all the wives pregnant, thecomment was made by one of thesurveyors; “cause you're sending usout of town all the time.” Skinnyretorted “no, it's ‘cause I let youcome home” (Ron Stothers). A fewweeks after starting work at Strong,Lamb and Nelson, I was observedsupporting a wall while waiting forthe party chief, which resulted inSkinny's question, “if you're here towork and I'm paying you get towork, handing me a snow shovel toclear the long melted snow on a hotJuly afternoon”—lesson learned.This was followed years later by avery serious meeting with the bossafter finally receiving my commis-sion and suggesting it wouldwarrent a major salary adjustment.Skinny's comments cooled thoseaspirations. “Yesterday you weremy best party chief today you're myworst land surveyor.”

Skinny truly left his mark.S.M. (SYD) LOEPPKY, ALS

Jules Francois Brassard1948 — 2007Jules was born on June 8, 1948 inEdson. He was the third of four boysand grew up in the Edson andHinton area. From the ages of 13 to18, Jules attended College St. Jeanin Edmonton where his strong faithand love for hockey became en-trenched.

Jules attended the University ofAlberta and worked his summers atNorthwestern Pulp and Power inHinton. In 1970, he graduated witha degree in chemical engineeringand shortly after he married hissweetheart Vicki in June of thatyear. They started their family andover time had four children: Nicole,Matthew, and the twins Graemeand Andrea.

Jules started his career inBurlington, Ontario working as achemical engineer with Dowell ofCanada. The busy fishing holesaround Toronto were not for him soJules and Vicki headed back toEdmonton where Jules worked forDowell for another two years beforemoving to Hinton where he workedas a process engineer with North-western Pulp and Power from 1973to 1977. His love of the outdoorsdrew him to open a sporting goodsstore named “The Hinton Sports-man.” Jules spent 18 years runninghis store. His four children allworked at the store and, throughJules, they were given the opportu-nity to appreciate and enjoy natureand learn his passion for the out-doors.

In 1996, Jules’ love of the out-doors grew so strong that he decidedto take up surveying so that hecould be with nature every day. Hesold the family store and startedsurveying with Dave Armstrong,ALS in Hinton. With the support ofhis family he went back to theUniversity of Calgary to studygeomatics at the tender age of 50.He told many people that he had tocomplete the program because hischildren were at university at thesame time as he and he could not letthem down or set a bad example.

Jules articled under DaveArmstrong and Don Grant fromApril 2000 to April 3, 2003 when he

received his commission as anAlberta Land Surveyor.

It was at the Annual GeneralMeeting of the Association in 2003when Jules made his mark on themembers present. During a lull atthe awards ceremony, Jules recitedRobert Service poetry from memory.Jules loved Robert Service’s poetryof the North.

During his short time as apracticing ALS he was able to serveon and participate in the Profes-sional Development Committee.

Amec employed Jules in 2003. Inlate 2003, he came on the market-place and Challenger offered him aposition. The company had nodefined position for Jules so hisoffer letter simply stated that if youcome to Challenger I think you willhave “fun.” His email back to thecompany a few days later said. “Iaccept your job offer of fun.”

Jules quickly defined a positionas the office manager in Ft.McMurray. The young staff whomwe acquired from all over thecountry, soon began treating Julesas a father figure. He accepted thatwith humility and as an honour.Jules managed the two largestsubdivisions that Challenger hasever undertaken. The two subdivi-sions comprise approximately 4,000lots. He spent many hours in thefield with staff surveying and heloved every minute of it. One of hisfavorite sayings was “find a job youlove and you never work a day inyour life.” He lived that.

Council and Staffof the

Alberta LandSurveyors’Association

wish you and yoursa very

Merry Christmasand

Happy New Year


Jules was diagnosed with mes-othelioma (asbestos exposurecancer) on January 18th of this year.It was traced to his summer jobs asa student in Hinton at the plantsites.

Jules accepted this news andsaid, “I will just beat this and moveon.” During his illness, Jules contin-ued to do all the things he loved. Hewent to his trap line up on theLittle Berland River to finish hisand his trapper friends’ cabin. Hewitnessed the birth of his thirdgrandchild. He traveled with hiswife and family and, though hecouldn’t play hockey anymore, hespent time with his hockey buddies.Jules, I found out was a very goodhockey player. Later on in hisillness, Jules commented that hewas looking forward to meeting theLord.

Jules and his wife and fourchildren ran marathons together.Yes, full 26-mile marathons. Thisyear during the Vancouver mara-thon, Jules could not run but therest of the family did and Jules wasthe excited coach waiting at thefinish line.

As noted earlier, Jules lovedRobert Service poetry. One of hisfavorites was “The Spell of theYukon.” The last 4 lines of the poemare very fitting for Jules. They golike this.

It’s the great, big, broad land‘way up yonder’,It’s the forests where silencehas lease;It’s the beauty that thrills mewith wonder;It’s the stillness that fills mewith Peace!

Jules passed away in the earlymorning of August 28th, 2007 sur-rounded by family. He was buriedin his hometown of Hinton onAugust 31, 2007. He will be missedby his family and friends. Julesleaves behind his wife Vicki, fourchildren, three grandchildren, twobrothers, his mother Dora, hisfriends and of course his “kids” inFt. McMurray.

YOUR FRIENDTIM HARDING, ALS

Hal Falkenberg1931 — 2007

Harold Gordon Falkenberg wasborn in 1931 in Edmonton, Alberta.As a farm boy, in the Frederick-sheim district near Leduc, helearned how to work the land withhorses, pick rocks, milk cows, cleanout barns, stook and pitch bundlesand tend the large vegetable garden(so necessary for food).

Except for a year-and-a-halfattending Eastwood ElementarySchool in Edmonton for his gradesthree and four while staying withhis grandmother, Harold receivedhis elementary education in theone-room country schools ofParkdale and Fredericksheim. Hegraduated from King George HighSchool in Leduc. Again he wasboarded by his grandfolks. Heplayed on the high school hockeyteam and also filled in for the Leducbaseball team whenever they wereshort of players.

Harold enrolled at the Universityof Alberta in Edmonton in the fall of1948 and graduated in 1952 with aBachelor of Science in Civil Engi-neering. Upon graduation he tookemployment with a survey firm inEdmonton and obtained his com-mission as an Alberta Land Sur-veyor the following year.

In December of 1953, Haroldmoved to a start-up survey firmfrom Calgary. This company was tobecome Midwest Survey & Engi-neering Ltd. of which he became apartner and general manager oftheir Edmonton office. The companyspecialized in surveying drillinglocations and pipeline right-of-waysin the booming petroleum industryin Western Canada.

In 1960, he left Midwest Surveysto join Shell Canada Limited astheir chief surveyor for all theiroperations in Canada. During hisseven years with Shell, Harold hada varied and interesting workexperience. This included surveysin the Northwest Territories as wellas special assignments for naviga-tional responsibilities for the firstoffshore explorations in Canada onthe Pacific and Atlantic oceans.Upon the deaths of his wife,Margaret and two daughters, Lisaand Jane, in July of 1967, Haroldrelocated to Calgary with his threesons. Shortly after, he was retainedas a consultant to Panarctic OilsLimited starting petroleum explora-tions in the Arctic Islands ofCanada.

He formed his own company,H.G. Falkenberg & Associates andexperienced some of his mostchallenging and interesting times inhis surveying career. This involvedthe location of drilling positions,conducting ice movement studies onthe Arctic Ocean and locating anddesigning many air strips requiredby Panarctic on land and ice. All ofthis in most hostile and fiercestenvironment in the world withmonths of total darkness and up to-130F wind-chill temperatures.

In 1978, under a contract withSheltech Surveys, Harold had hisfirst foreign survey experience on aCIDA project in Zaire, Africa. Bythis time surveying technology hadadvanced to positioning by the useof satellites orbiting the earth. Healso spent most of a year in Somaliasurveying navigational control offthe Gulf of Aden.

Before his retirement in 1992,Harold had also worked in Sudan,Spain and Greenland. One of hisproudest achievements was hisinvolvement with the survey of thelongest railway tunnel in the West-ern Hemisphere for CP Rail in theRogers Pass of British Columbia.In 1992, Harold Falkenberg becamea life member of the Association ofProfessional Engineers Geologistsand Geophysicists of Alberta andcelebrated 50 years as an AlbertaLand Surveyor in 2003.

EXCERPTED FROM ‘OUR FALKENBERG FAMILY’BY LUCILLE EFFA


history This is the latest in a series of articles on the history of theALSA and its members. For more information, check outwww.landsurveyinghistory.ab.ca.

1936-1939 — An All-Time Low

During the next four years,economic conditions slowly im-proved and surveying activitygradually increased, but Associationaffairs were never more stagnantthan during this period. Only twonew members were registered,while half a dozen died or retiredand, by 1939, the membershipfigure reached an all-time low of 38and the Association was havingdifficulty in making ends meetfinancially. It was reluctant to drawupon its assets, as these consistedentirely of provincial governmentbonds on which interest paymentshad been stopped by the new gov-ernment and the bonds themselveswere worth less than half their facevalue. The best policy seemed to beto hold on to them until such timeas the moratorium on interestpayments might be lifted, whichhopefully would restore theirmarket value to a higher figure. Amembership levy was consideredimpractical, because most membersfelt that the normal membership feeof $10.00 was as much as theyshould be expected to pay for thesupport of an organization thatseemed to be doing little or nothingto further their interests, and thosewho could not attend meetings evenwith the aid of the railway farerebate would have objected topaying higher annual fees for thebenefit of those who could.

The Council was thus obliged tohold expenditures down as much aspossible, and any ideas that mightentail the spending of money re-ceived little encouragement. How-ever, this austerity did not extendto the annual meeting, whichcontinued to be held at the besthotels and wound up with the usualsumptuous repast and concomitantentertainment and refreshments forwhich the Association footed thewhole bill. Nor did it prevent themembers present at the 1938Annual Meeting from having secondthoughts about boycotting theCanadian Institute of Surveying,

when they voted an annual expendi-ture of $30.00 in renewing theirgroup subscription to The CanadianSurveyor. But even these modestextravagances were looked ataskance by some, and at the 1939meeting a formal resolution waspassed, instructing the incomingCouncil to give serious considera-tion to "ways and means of reducingour expenditures."

Meanwhile, very little action of aconstructive or enterprising naturewas in evidence. In 1937, the Asso-ciation did manage to persuade theprovincial government that ap-proval and registration fees forsubdivision plans should be re-duced, but this benefitted theirclients rather than the surveyorsthemselves and was, in any case,not particularly significant in viewof the relatively small number ofsubdivisions being made at thattime. At the 1938 Annual Meeting,the members adopted a resolutionrecommending that legislation beenacted to require the filing of plansshowing any re-establishment ofsection, quarter-section or legalsubdivision corners carried out byAlberta Land Surveyors, and theAlberta Surveys Act was amendedaccordingly in 1939.

The 1938 meeting was alsonotable as the first which Mr. P.N.Johnson had failed to attend sincethe founding of the Association. Illhealth kept him at home and in thespring of that year obliged him toretire as Director of Surveys, thusending an outstanding career thathad been marked throughout by hisdevotion to the surveying professionand the public interests served bythe work of land surveyors.

The 1939 Annual Meeting saw arevival of interest in the provisionof a surveyors' manual, and thePublications Committee, after manyyears of inactivity, was enlargedand instructed once more to lookinto the matter of contents and cost.This time the project was diligentlypursued, and eventually, by dint of

the Secretary-Treasurer's efforts incompiling and personally preparingthe copy from which it was printed,the first edition of the first ALSManual was published in 1944.

Mandel, L. (1998) The DelgamuukwDecision. [online] Available from:http://www.delgamuukw.org/perspec-tives/decision.pdf [Accessed January15, 2006].

McEachern, A. [transcribed by un-known author] (1993) Native LandClaims in British Columbia: Judg-ment of the Honourable Chief JusticeAllan McEachern [online] Availablefrom: http://victoria.tc.ca/history/etext/delgamuukw.land.judgment.html[Accessed January 15, 2006].

McNeil, Kent (2000) Aboriginal title asa constitutionally protected propertyright. In: Lippert, Owen (ed)Beyond the Nass valley: nationalimplications of the Supreme Court’sDelgamuukw decision. Vancouver,The Fraser Institute. p. 55-75.KF5660 .A75 B49 2000

McNeil, K. (1998) Defining aboriginaltitle in the 90’s: Has the SupremeCourt finally got it right? [online]Available from: www.delgamuukw.org/perspectives/defining.pdf[Accessed January 14, 2006].

Nwabueze B.O. 1972. Nigerian LandLaw, Nwamife Publishers, Enugu,Oceana, New York.

R. v. Van der Peet, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 507Slattery, Brian (2000) The nature of

aboriginal title. In: Lippert, Owen(ed) Beyond the Nass valley: nationalimplications of the Supreme Court’sDelgamuukw decision. Vancouver,The Fraser Institute. p. 11-33.

St. Catherine’s Milling and LumberCo. v. The Queen (1888) 14 App.Cas. 46 (J.C.P.C).

Implications of theDelgamuukw DecisionReferences continued from page 25

Documents

December 2007 ALS News • 1 · Tim Harding, ALS 9 Editor’s Notes Brian Munday, Executive Director 13 Letters 18 Association Notes New Members Members on the …