-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Surface Management/Minerals Management Status series
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:44:58 -0700
From: Julie Sweetkind-Singer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
References: <[log in to unmask]>
At Stanford, we keep all editions of California and Nevada. For the
rest of the states, we keep only the most recent edition (same for the 7
1/2 minute series).
Julie
Maps-L Moderator wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: Surface Management/Minerals Management Status series
> Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:20:18 -0400
> From: Grabach, Kenneth A. Mr. <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> References: <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> Jenny, and others:
>
> My collection had formerly retained all editions of all sheets of both
> the Surface and Mineral Management series. This was part of a general
> policy to retain all topographic maps, of all series. I recently
> revised this to allow for exceptions in certain series of maps,
> including the BLM 1:100,000 Surface and Mineral Management series.
>
> Reasoning for this is that, 1) the series is intended to reflect
> current status for various activities on BLM lands, including
> recreation, grazing, forestry, mineral and petroleum extraction. 2)
> they cover lands in states not contiguous to Ohio. 3) their use in
> the map collection has been very low, even since adding the series to
> the database for the OPAC. While there is interest from the Geology
> Dept here for the Rocky Mountains areas, there has none the less been
> very low usage of this series. Therefore, because of all three
> points, I decided to retain current editions only. I will retain one
> copy of each sheet in each series, and withdraw it when a new edition
> is received.
>
> Another map series that I revised in this way is the National Forest
> Service maps (other than topographic quadrangles adapted for Forest
> Service use). Based on points 1) and 3) above, I determined that I
> could not afford the space to make this a growing collection. I
> withdraw the older edition of each title as a newer one is received.
> I will retain older maps when no new revision is received, and
> occasionally new titles (not revisions of previous titles) are
> received, so there is some growth. But I anticipate being able to
> keep these in a single 4-drawer filing cabinet for a long time.
>
> Ken Grabach <[log in to unmask]>
> Maps Librarian Phone: 513-529-1726
> Miami University Libraries
> Oxford, Ohio 45056 USA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maps-L Moderator
> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 9:54 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Surface Management/Minerals Management Status series
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Surface Management/Minerals Management Status series
> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:16:55 -0500
> From: Jenny Marie Johnson <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
> To: MAPS-L <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> Hi.
>
> I'm wondering what kind of retention policies people have for the BLM
> 1:100,000-scale surface management status and minerals management status
> series.
>
> Do you keep all editions? Do you just retain the most recent edition
> received and withdraw older editions?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jenny Marie Johnson
> Map and Geography Librarian and
> Assoc. Professor of Library Administration
>
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
--
Julie Sweetkind-Singer
Head Librarian, GIS & Map Librarian
Branner Earth Sciences Library & Map Collections
397 Panama Mall; MC/2211
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
650-725-1102 (phone)
[log in to unmask]
|
