Introduction
When I was asked on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of 'Snellius' to write
a short article on the subject of Geomatics in Canada, it occurred to me that this
would be rather too serious a subject for this event. Celebrations of this type call
for a degree of lightheadedness, gratefulness for what the past has given us, and
optimism and excitement about what is yet to come. Upon reflection however,
it seemed not inappropriate to address the subject at this time. After all, in the
50 years of 'Snellius" existence, we have seen a revolutionary change in Geodesy
and surveying and mapping. Its scientific development, how it is being practised,
and how it relates to the other professions and society at large, have significantly
changed. During my recent two year assignment at the International Institute for
Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences (ITC), I noticed that these changes have
not universally met with optimism about the future of Geodetic education in
Delft and about employment opportunities for its graduates. This, in light of my
own experience was a surprising discovery. I strongly feel that the traditional
pillars on which the geodesy education in Delft is based, namely mathematical
and physical Geodesy, law, and land consolidation (a form of applied Geography)
prepare Dutch geodesists well for leadership functions in Geomatics develop
ment. Hence, I feel very positive about employment opportunities for geodesy
graduates, provided the education continues to be well balanced with respect to
the three "pillars" mentioned, and that over-specialization is avoided.
Although I do not have the figures, it would be interesting to see the Geodesy
curriculum of 50 years ago and compare it with that of today. I would expect that
the hours spent on learning skills of surveying, mapping, cartographic drafting,
as well as computing as a proportion of the total number of formal education
hours would show a significant reduction. The reason for this is that the
computer and communication technology have made many skills redundant while
on the other hand it has regenerated, at the professional engineering level, a
greater need for fundamental understanding of the underlying assumptions and
models in Geodesy.
We have been fortunate that in Delft world class research started by Tienstra and
continued by Baarda and others, resulted in the generalization of geodetic
processes in a consistent mathematically formulated theory. This meant that any
geodetic or control survey could be a priori analyzed to predict the outcome of
the survey together with a quantification of the value of this prediction.In other
words, the a priori decision making was detached from the actual execution of
the survey. This aspect was completely new and for me an inspiration when,
some years ago, I was faced with very expensive technology investments in the
topographic and geographic mapping of Canada which I knew would revolu
tionize our mission interpretations, our organization and the way we would relate
to our clients and private sector producers. I had come to the conclusion that if
376
