Sign In   |   Register
Community Search
Calendar

1/18/2018 » 1/19/2018
ANNUAL TECHNICAL SEMINAR

7/19/2018 » 7/21/2018
2018 ANNUAL MEETING & SUMMER CONVENTION

The case for dropping the hydrology requirement
Thread Score:
|<
<
1 |
2
Thread Actions

5/23/2017 at 1:05:33 PM GMT
Posts: 1
Thanks for taking the time to put this together, Mark.  It was a very good read.


5/24/2017 at 12:40:19 PM GMT
Posts: 16
I agree with Mark, and would like to see the hydrology part dropped from the definition and eliminated from the test. When I took the test in 1995, it was the first time hydrology was included. It tripped me up and I had to take that part again. I have never designed storm or sanitary and do not intend to. I want engineers to stay out of our business and I will gladly stay out of theirs.


6/10/2017 at 5:58:02 PM GMT
Posts: 5
How about a Two-Tier system? Let those who want to do design/hydraulics acquire further training.

I'm in favor of increasing the educational requirements for new registrants. I posted a while back on the 4 year degree thread, so I won't repeat that, but additional educational requirements coupled with a required internship would go a long way toward helping things. This is a very different world than from back when I was a puppy, and education is the key to the future.

Dale Yawn


8/11/2017 at 11:39:02 AM GMT
Posts: 4
Well said. I agree.


10/16/2017 at 2:36:17 AM GMT
Posts: 1
While hydrology is a pointless requirement, I think it would be very unwise to further reduce professional requirements in the state while every other state is heading in the other direction.


Sign In
Sign In securely

Sustaining Members