Bravo to Rep Lynch, Stephen F. , MA; Rep Kaptur, Marcy OH; Rep Lipinski, Daniel IL; Rep Quigley, Mike IL; and Rep Shuler, Heath NC. These distinguished people had an issue and they came up with a solution. They needed (?) Native American Iron workers. Or they wanted them, or they just saw an opportunity to help some Indians in need of work. At any rate, they have begun the long legislative journey to provide a means to that end: H.R.1129.
H.R.1129
This fancy piece of social work just passed by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and they liked it. This will provide (with "available" funds) an annual grant to someone, some corporation, some entity (National Training Center?) to train Indians how to become Iron Workers and then assist them with job placement. BRAVO! BRAVO!
Why didn't anybody do this instead of the current Non-Tribal-Contractor-Friendly Cadastral Surveying Program?
We can do that? We can provide necessary training for a specific need? We don't have to accept all these non-native contractors who will hold their hand out for money every year when we NEED cadastral surveys conducted? We don't have to accept State, County, and City Surveyors who are trained as CFEDS surveyors, and who also hold the distinction of having a conflict of interest as it relates to releasing the survey information publicly, and representing entities with whom we may have border disputes, and tax disputes? Wow!
Someone should make up a bill like this to replace the horrible CFEDS program. It's only feeding contractors annual jobs on our reservations and we get nothing more than a survey from it. We aren't becoming empowered; we really are at the mercy of a bunch of people, even within the federal government who will subvert our sovereignty, or who will release our National information to several government entities that never were empowered to sign treaties with us.
I'm sure that the Senate Committe on Indian Affairs would gladly look a bill like this over and pass it along. The Tribes would.
"Think outside the box because the box probably belongs to a contractor"
This isn't new; read more here:
Surveys on a reservation A penny for your appraisal
A Grand Contracted Mess Yet More Motivations
President Obama's Contract Reform memo, a fix to the Grand Contracting Mess
Showing posts with label Tribal Surveys. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tribal Surveys. Show all posts
Friday, August 7, 2009
Friday, November 30, 2007
Surveys on a Reservation
The latest craze to sweep federal surveyors offices is the program called CFEDs. It's a training program for certifying surveyors to perform federal surveys, cadastral services, BLM surveys, surveys for Tribes.
The requirements for becoming a CFEDs surveyor are really loose. REALLY really loose. REALLY REALLY REALLY LOOSE!
Why is this so important? Well if your tribe needs a survey performed that is of a Federal survey type, or a cadastral survey for oh, lets say a border dispute between the Tribe (reservation) and a state or a county, BLM usually is the one to do that. BLM has always done tribal cadastral surveys I am told. This CFEDs program replaces BLM surveyors with CFEDs surveyors because BLM cannot keep up with the demand for surveys from tribes. Basically, they are contracting out their services, their role in the fiduciary responsibility of the federal government, their oversight of an ethical survey. (remember the ethics part, I'll address this later in this entry)
So how loose are the requirements for becoming a CFEDs surveyor? Well if you look at the CFEDs Site you'll find that you have to meet two requirements:
1. be a licensed surveyor in any state
2. have no (negative) disciplinary actions in any state regulatory board or court in the last five years.
That is all that is required. For anything else, the sky's the limit. hmmmmmmm.
"Anything else" covers a lot of ground doesn't it? It does indeed!
What is meant when I said "anything else?" Let's say you're a CFEDs surveyor working at your normal job, and you get a call from Bureau of Land Management, or a tribe to go to a reservation to settle a border dispute between the Tribe and the State. You go in you do your thing, you check titles, you check monuments, you recheck titles, you do everything to uphold the integrity of your profession and decide that the land in dispute goes to the State. Easy right? Too easy!
How can you uphold the integrity of your profession...recommend a boundary dispute resolution in favor of a state, between a tribe and the state, as a CFEDs surveyor...when you are a state or county elected-surveyor? Remember the only requirements are listed above. There are no restrictions on anything else! So, elected surveyors, and state and city employee-surveyors, can (AND ARE) participating in the CFEDs process!
Which God will this surveyor serve? Will he serve the state, county or city he is an employee at, or an elected official of, or will he serve the Tribe for whom he is under contract through the BLM?
I brought this up quite a long time ago (2 years ago at a BIA realty conference in Lincoln City Oregon) and there was no answer. Now the first class has graduated from the CFEDs course and within the first four pages of my print out from the list I have found three CFEDs surveyors who meet the ethical dilema I have described here. I have also found several who have written questionable material as it relates to Tribal cultures.
So, what about that crazy word "ethics?" Let's see what one of the coordinators of the CFEDs program has to say about ethics. Dennis Mouland, one of the training coordinators has a venerated book called Ethics for the Professional Surveyor. He also has a fan, William Schmidt, who wrote a glowing review of the book, for Professional Surveyor Magazine.
He describes Dennis Moulan's "thoughts" on the subject of ethics as a word that '...originally meant habit, or the way someone is disposed to act.' He also says the word means the "right way," or "the approved or a proven way."
Well I have news for Dennis Mouland. I do not approve of the way that they are randomly creating a plethora of ethical dilemas for a bunch of surveyors whose real jobs may depend on how they are "disposed to act," during a border dispute between the Tribe and their real employers.
And really now, how can anybody who works for any state (say California) understand the real complexities of a border dispute between a tribe and another state (say Idaho) when they are working for another state?
I don't know, what do you think? What is your stand on this?
What about background checks? How many people serve on organizations that purport to deny tribal jurisdiction exists and are on the list of CFEDs surveyors? (I'm looking at you--you know who you are, and it's only a matter of time before this becomes painfully evident to the world)
Talk to your tribal councils, talk to your chairmen, your presidents, your program directors, ask them if they understand how screwed up this program is in its implementation from the ground up.
A friend of mine from Haskell Indian Nations University who shall remain nameless to protect Cricket's identiy, (Hi Cricket!) has this on her page and I think it's only too appropriate:
He who serves two masters has to lie to one.
The requirements for becoming a CFEDs surveyor are really loose. REALLY really loose. REALLY REALLY REALLY LOOSE!
Why is this so important? Well if your tribe needs a survey performed that is of a Federal survey type, or a cadastral survey for oh, lets say a border dispute between the Tribe (reservation) and a state or a county, BLM usually is the one to do that. BLM has always done tribal cadastral surveys I am told. This CFEDs program replaces BLM surveyors with CFEDs surveyors because BLM cannot keep up with the demand for surveys from tribes. Basically, they are contracting out their services, their role in the fiduciary responsibility of the federal government, their oversight of an ethical survey. (remember the ethics part, I'll address this later in this entry)
So how loose are the requirements for becoming a CFEDs surveyor? Well if you look at the CFEDs Site you'll find that you have to meet two requirements:
1. be a licensed surveyor in any state
2. have no (negative) disciplinary actions in any state regulatory board or court in the last five years.
That is all that is required. For anything else, the sky's the limit. hmmmmmmm.
"Anything else" covers a lot of ground doesn't it? It does indeed!
What is meant when I said "anything else?" Let's say you're a CFEDs surveyor working at your normal job, and you get a call from Bureau of Land Management, or a tribe to go to a reservation to settle a border dispute between the Tribe and the State. You go in you do your thing, you check titles, you check monuments, you recheck titles, you do everything to uphold the integrity of your profession and decide that the land in dispute goes to the State. Easy right? Too easy!
How can you uphold the integrity of your profession...recommend a boundary dispute resolution in favor of a state, between a tribe and the state, as a CFEDs surveyor...when you are a state or county elected-surveyor? Remember the only requirements are listed above. There are no restrictions on anything else! So, elected surveyors, and state and city employee-surveyors, can (AND ARE) participating in the CFEDs process!
Which God will this surveyor serve? Will he serve the state, county or city he is an employee at, or an elected official of, or will he serve the Tribe for whom he is under contract through the BLM?
I brought this up quite a long time ago (2 years ago at a BIA realty conference in Lincoln City Oregon) and there was no answer. Now the first class has graduated from the CFEDs course and within the first four pages of my print out from the list I have found three CFEDs surveyors who meet the ethical dilema I have described here. I have also found several who have written questionable material as it relates to Tribal cultures.
So, what about that crazy word "ethics?" Let's see what one of the coordinators of the CFEDs program has to say about ethics. Dennis Mouland, one of the training coordinators has a venerated book called Ethics for the Professional Surveyor. He also has a fan, William Schmidt, who wrote a glowing review of the book, for Professional Surveyor Magazine.
He describes Dennis Moulan's "thoughts" on the subject of ethics as a word that '...originally meant habit, or the way someone is disposed to act.' He also says the word means the "right way," or "the approved or a proven way."
Well I have news for Dennis Mouland. I do not approve of the way that they are randomly creating a plethora of ethical dilemas for a bunch of surveyors whose real jobs may depend on how they are "disposed to act," during a border dispute between the Tribe and their real employers.
And really now, how can anybody who works for any state (say California) understand the real complexities of a border dispute between a tribe and another state (say Idaho) when they are working for another state?
I don't know, what do you think? What is your stand on this?
What about background checks? How many people serve on organizations that purport to deny tribal jurisdiction exists and are on the list of CFEDs surveyors? (I'm looking at you--you know who you are, and it's only a matter of time before this becomes painfully evident to the world)
Talk to your tribal councils, talk to your chairmen, your presidents, your program directors, ask them if they understand how screwed up this program is in its implementation from the ground up.
A friend of mine from Haskell Indian Nations University who shall remain nameless to protect Cricket's identiy, (Hi Cricket!) has this on her page and I think it's only too appropriate:
He who serves two masters has to lie to one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
