Topo quads produced by different agencies (GS, FS, CE, AMS) can be
cataloged as separate titles (or
the series can be cataloged as separately) but interfiled as if they were a
single set for easy
discovery and retrieval.  I agree that users are rarely, if ever,
interested in which agency produced the quad -- they just want to find it
with the least amount of effort.

Philip Hoehn

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Wagner, Leslie A <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> We went from filing them under one catalog record as a series (for each
> national forest) to cataloging and maintaining them separately so that the
> individual sheets can be found and utilized. The original Forest Service
> series records did not list the separate quads/sheets by title, making them
> difficult to locate. All quads/sheets relating to a particular forest can
> still be found by forest name. Our reasoning? Make it discoverable!
>
>
>
> Leslie Wagner
>
> Metadata Archivist
>
> Access & Discovery
>
> University of Texas at Arlington Libraries
>
> 817-272-6209 <(817)%20272-6209>
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Maps-L: Map Librarians, etc. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On
> Behalf Of *Angela R Cope
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 21, 2016 1:39 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Forest Service 1:24,000 Quads/Quadrangles
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> Will you reply to me or the list and tell me if you ...
>
>
>
> a) interfile the Forest Service quads with your general USGS topographic
> quads
>
>
>
> or
>
>
>
> b) Keep the Forest Service maps in a separate location.
>
>
>
> I'd love to hear why you think it's important for these maps to be
> together or kept separate, so if you have a moment, please include a
> sentence or two on that issue.
>
>
>
> If I get any off list replies, I'll send a summary ...
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for your input.
>
>
>
> Angie
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
> p.s. I'm pasting a thread below from a 2004 Maps-L conversation about the
> Forest Service quads. It's interesting to see how they differ from the
> regular quads. Kathleen, are your's still interfiled? [image: 😊]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------- Original Message --------
>
> Subject: Re: USGS Forest Service Revised Quads]
>
> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:52:38 -0400
>
> From: Steve Morris <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Organization: NCSU Libraries
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------
>
>
>
> More info about the USFS quad sheets may be found at the North Carolina
>
> Geologic Survey topo map site at: http://tinyurl.com/3b8f6  ... the URL
> was
>
> too long to cut and paste.  Click on the "Single-edition revision" link for
>
> the USFS map details.
>
>
>
> Key points are that the interagency agreement allows the USFS to update
> only
>
> the National Forest land on a quadrangle and that DRG copies were not
>
> routinely produced, so:
>
>
>
> "... areas outside the National Forest System lands may not have been
>
> revised and could be significantly older than the printed map date. Users
>
> should note that:
>
>
>
> In many cases, map revisions on a topographic map are performed only within
>
> the USFS national forest boundaries;
>
>
>
> In certain cases, partial and inconsistent feature revisions are performed
>
> outside the USFS national forest boundary; and
>
>
>
> Soft copy (the equivalent of a DRG) may not be as current as the published
>
> paper map."
>
>
>
> Some of this information on the NCGS page was summarized from the following
>
> report:
>
>
>
> Moore, Larry, 2000, The U.S. Geological Survey's revision program for
>
> 7.5-minute topographic maps, in Soller, David R., editor,  Digital Mapping
>
> Techniques '00-Workshop Proceedings, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File
> Report
>
> 00-325, p. 21-26.
>
> http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/of00-325/moore.html
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Steve Morris
>
>
>
>
>
> "Johnnie D. Sutherland" wrote:
>
>
>
> > -------- Original Message --------
>
> > Subject: USGS Forest Service Revised Quads
>
> > Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 14:39:53 -0400
>
> > From: Weessies, Kathleen <[log in to unmask]>
>
> >
>
> > ------------------
>
> > I am looking for facts and opinions on the USGS 7.5' quads that were
>
> > revised by the U.S. Forest Service.  I have been interfiling them with
>
> > 'regular' USGS quads.  We are now creating cataloging records for state
>
> > sets.  My records are stretching out to include all the photorevised and
>
> > provisional editions of each quad, but I decided to draw the line at the
>
> > 7.5 x 15 and the Forest Service quads.  The 7.5 x 15 are the only USGS
>
> > 1:24,000 quad of a particular place, but for whatever reason I decided
>
> > to catalog them in a different record.
>
> >
>
> > Does anyone have any particular knowledge about the difference between
>
> > the USGS and the Forest Service quads?  Are they indeed a different
>
> > product or simply a little extra shading and pink lines that shouldn't
>
> > bother anyone?  Many quads have other authors such as Corps of
>
> > Engineers, State agencies, etc.  Are the Forest Service quads simply
>
> > another variation or are they truly different?  Does the USGS consider
>
> > them to be part of the set or a different animal?
>
> >
>
> > Kathleen Weessies
>
> > Maps/GIS Librarian
>
> > Michigan State University
>
> > 100 Library W308
>
> > East Lansing, MI  48824
>
> > (517)432-6123 x250 <(517)%20432-6123>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Steve Morris
>
> Head of Digital Library Initiatives
>
> North Carolina State University Libraries
>
> Phone: (919) 515-1361  Fax: (919) 513-3553
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>