--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 17:03:01 -0400
From: Omni Resources <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: GPO FUNDING FOR FY 2001, IMPACT OF PROPOSD CUTS <fwd>
Sender: Omni Resources <[log in to unmask]>
Hi;
My own two cents worth. I think that there are a few areas/reasons where
you (MapQuest) are unique compared to a depository/university library.
1) You do not serve the public - you serve the corporate needs of MapQuest.
Or even if you do allow public walk-ins (I don't know if you do or not) I
would assume you do not have the volume of public walk-ins that say the NY
Public Library has. By serving the corporate needs rather than the MUCH
broader public needs, you do not need the broad spectrum of maps and gov't
documents that a public library does.
2) Do you hold total 1:24,000 coverage of the USA; some 60,000 topo maps?
I would assume that you might. Do you hold the additional 33,000 or so
maps the USGS produces? I would assume that you might not. Current
replacement cost on the USGS topo "collection" is probably pushing
$0.5million; $250,000 for the 1:24,000 series (60,000 sheets at $4/sheet)
plus roughly $230,000 for the 1:50,000/1:100,000/1:250,000/special sheets,
geology sheets, etc. (33,000 sheets @ $7/sheet). That price is far outside
the budget of any public library.
3) You are probably not interested in the historical aspect of, for
instance, the 1:24,000 topo series. Do you keep the superceded copies of
topos? These maps get extensive usage in looking at environment issues,
cultural issues, land use, etc. and in some cases are a significant
percentage of the total use of maps in a library. Cost of either obtaining
these maps after-the-fact and/or maintaining/storing them is another huge
expenses.
4) Your financial resources are probably much greater than many, if not
most, public libraries. Admittedly this guess is based solely on
MapQuest's recent public stock offering and the recent purchase by AOL. If
you have a corporate need for a certain set of maps, you will probably have
the funds to get it. Some map libraries at recognized universities have an
annual discretionary budget of less than $2000.
5) Have you ever borrowed a map from a public library? Gone to one to view
a map that you couldn't purchase within your time frame?
6) My comments above have been limited only to maps. If you throw in the
hundreds of thousands of pages of other GoDocs reports that the public find
useful - mineral reports; environmental reports, studies, and impact
statements; gov't studies of one sort or another, etc. the cost of
obtaining these becomes another significant expense.
7) The total cost savings of the proposed cuts is something like $30m/year.
Somehow I suspect that the bulk of that savings would get eaten up by
increased costs of development of user-friendly access software, production
of the products, dissemination, and storage.
As to the other issues, I think that we are clearly "going digital" whether
we like it or not. As with many others, I have no faith though, born from
experience, that the gov't can accurately produce, maintain, archive, and
allow access to, digital files/collections. Anyone who has messed with the
various generations of DRGs from the USGS knows what a mess those were -
non-working, one generation not compatible with the next generation, etc.
How often have you tried to go to a gov't site to find it shut down for one
reason or another - virus, hacker attack, "maintenance", inadequate access
pipelines, etc?
I think that we are still several years away, at best, from being ready to
handle, at both the "source" and the "end user," the switch to digital that
the current proposed budget cuts will require.
There is the very real issue that 2/3 of American households do not have
computers at home. If you are in a poor region you may not have free
access to the web at your public library or at your school either, leaving
your nearest depository library as your nearest source of those public
documents. Most people, and most public libraries do not have large-size
digital plotters that can plot out a usable copy of a topo map.
Yes, paper maps are subject to flood, fire, etc., as the experience in Ft.
Collins a few years ago showed. What also showed was how many maps they
were able to recover from other libraries that had extra copies. If all
the USGS topos were digital and the "Love Bug" got into the files - what then?
Finally, showing my age here, when I'm out in a pouring rain in the
backwoods of Montana, I don't want my tiny little palmpilot, I want my
waterproof topo map - makes a great hat, toilet paper etc.
Cheers,
Russell Guy
At 12:14 PM 5/15/00 -0400, you wrote:
>--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
>Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 20:29:06 +0500
>From: Quinn Koller <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Fwd: GPO FUNDING FOR FY 2001, IMPACT OF PROPOSD CUTS <fwd>
>Sender: Quinn Koller <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>I can't resist putting in my 2 cents and playing devil's advocate. With
>the government's push to become more digital in its dissemination of
>information, it seems to me that depository libraries become somewhat
>irrelevant and unnecessary. As the director of a map library who has
>built its collection without the benefit of depository status, I guess I
>just don't see what the big deal is.
>
>~ Quinn
>--
>___________________________________________________________
>Quinn R. Koller [log in to unmask]
>Manager (717) 285-8477
>Library & Information Services fax (717) 285-8600
>MapQuest.com Inc.
>P.O. Box 601
>Mountville, PA 17554-0601
>
>http://www.mapquest.com
>The Ultimate Destination for Directions
>___________________________________________________________
>The opinions expressed are my own and do not represent the
>opinions or policies of MapQuest.com Inc.
>
>Johnnie Sutherland wrote:
>>
>> Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 16:59:20 -0700
>> From: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Re: Fwd: GPO FUNDING FOR FY 2001, IMPACT OF PROPOSD CUTS <fwd>
>> Sender: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Aim=E9e_Quinn?= <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>> Actually, this bill is death to depositories (okay, so I am a bit
>> melodramatic too). However the outlook for the Hose vote appears grim.
>> We, meaning folks who are really interested in preserving the spirit of
>> the depository laws, really need to have our users as well as our
>> colleagues write,fax, or phone their Congressional delegation to let
>> them know what they think. For more points regarding this situation,
>> please refer to the GODORT web page
>> http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/GODORT/2001appro.html for further details,
>> examples of letters written and talking points.
>>
>> Thanks for reading my two cents!
>>
>> Aimee Quinn
>> University of Nevada Las Vegas
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Friday, May 12, 2000 9:11 AM
>> Subject: Re: Fwd: GPO FUNDING FOR FY 2001, IMPACT OF PROPOSD CUTS <fwd>
>> >--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
>> >Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 15:32:49 -0600 (MDT)
>> >From: Thiry <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Subject: Re: Fwd: GPO FUNDING FOR FY 2001, IMPACT OF PROPOSD CUTS <fwd>
>> >Sender: Thiry <[log in to unmask]>
>> >
>> >
>> >My 2 cents.
>> >
>> >If this passes, what is use in being a depository library? What will
>> be
>> >deposited?
>> >
>> >Also, since we are required BY LAW to provide access to US Government
>> >information to people living in
>> >our Congressional District, I am wondering were my Library is going to
>> >come up with all the extra money for new computers, bigger monitors (so
>> >you can look at maps), and maintenance of the computers?
>> >
>> >Basically, for those of us with much of a budget, this bill spells
>> death
>> >for our collections. (Okay, I know I am being overly dramatic, but
>> >please. Destroying the Depository Program so we all can get $200 tax
>> >break doesn't make sense.)
>> >
>> >--Christopher JJ Thiry
>> >Map Librarian
>> >Colorado School of Mines
>> >1400 Illinois
>> >PO Box 4029
>> >Golden, CO 80401-0029
>> >
>> >voice: 303-273-3697
>> >fax: 303-273-3199
>> >
>> >[log in to unmask]
>> >http://www.mines.edu/library/maproom/
>> >http://www.mines.edu/fs_home/cthiry/
>> >--- End Forwarded Message ---
>> --- End Forwarded Message ---
>--- End Forwarded Message ---
>
Please use "reply" to include previous correspondence
***************************************************
Customer Service [log in to unmask]
Omni Resources www.omnimap.com/maps.htm
International Map Specialists Tel.: 336-227-8300
P.O. Box 2096 Fax: 336-227-3748
1004 South Mebane St.
Burlington, NC 27216-2096 USA
***************************************************
--- End Forwarded Message ---
|
