----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Following is an extract of a report on "a very interesting conference"
attended by Duncan Aldrich (Chair-elect, ALA/Government Documents Round
Table) last week.  I thought folks on this list may be interested in
seeing it.  (Thanks to Duncan for his permission to re-post his
message!)
--Rhonda Marker (Chair, GODORT Cataloging Committee)
Rutgers University Libraries
908/932-5902
[log in to unmask]
 
                **********Original message**********
 
 
Date: Mon, 17 May 1993 21:39:00 CST
Subject: National Geo-Data Policy Forum
Sender: Discussion of Government Document Issues <[log in to unmask]>
 
From: [log in to unmask] (Duncan Aldrich)
Date: Mon, 17 May 1993 17:59:00 +0000
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: National Geo-Data Policy Forum
 
Folks:
 
Below is a somewhat lengthy report of a VERY interesting conference
I attended in D.C. last week.
 
duncan
 
  ***********************
 
Duncan M. Aldrich
Head, Government Publications Department
Main Library
University of Nevada, Reno
Reno, Nevada 89557-0044
 
(702) 784-6570
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
 
  ***********************
 
National Geo-Data Policy Forum
 
Thanks to a recommendation from Prue Adler of ARL, I was
invited to participate in a panel discussion held at the
National Geo-Data Policy Forum, which met on Monday, May
10, through Wednesday, May 12.  The Forum's theme was
"Present and Emerging U.S. Policies Governing the
Development, Evolution and Use of the National Spatial
Infrastructure."  The topic of the panel on which I served
was "Issues of Public Access to Data, Data Fees and
Copyright."  Other members of the panel included Ed Spar
(moderator), of the Council of Professional Association on
Federal Statistics, Hugh Archer, Information Management
Consultant, Michael Blakemore; Executive Director, British
Online Manpower Information System; James Love, Director,
Taxpayer Assets Project; Steven Metalitz, Vice President
and General Counsel, Information Industry Association;  and a
gentleman from OMB who filled in for the scheduled OMB
participant, Peter Weiss.  Needless to say, the prospect of
discussion with these folks was a bit heady to a library
department head from the mountains of Nevada.
 
The biggest impression I got from the conference was that
there is an enormous amount of spatial data out there that
is without any sort of control -- bibliographic or
otherwise.  Hundreds of towns, counties, states, and
federal agencies are developing a rich body of computerized mapping
data, but there is neither an agency that has any
specific responsibility for identifying, cataloging, and
providing access to that information resource, nor is there an
established index or catalog that delineates these
resources.  This lack of bibliographic control made me, as
a librarian, more than a bit uneasy.  One federal
government committee, the Federal Geographic Data
Committee, was established in 1990 to examine this
disparate situation, and to work toward coordinating
efforts to bring some sort of order to spatial data at all
levels of government.  The National Geo-Data Policy Forum,
of course, was one step in that direction.
 
The second impression I got was that most federal
bureaucrats, at least on the face of it, buy into the
concept that user fees should be no higher than the nominal costs
of disseminating the information.  At the same time,
however, I only heard one federal official mention
libraries as potential outlets for spatial data.  Of course the
focus of my comments was that libraries are obvious
service points for all categories of Americans requiring
access to spatial data.
 
My third impression was that many spatial data producers at the
local level ardently believe that fees should be set so as to
recover costs associated with production as well as
dissemination of their data products.  A major point they
raise is that without such fees their ability to enhance
and expand their products will be minimized.  Their
underlying premise is that the spatial data with which they work is
intended for internal government work, not as a
public good.  My initial response to the forcefulness with
which they express their concern is that the library
community should re-examine its position on the question of user
fees for certain types of government information,
particularly at the local level.  After a bit of
reflection, however, I concluded that perhaps the more
important response will be for librarians to renew with
vigor their efforts to impress upon (educate) local
agencies the inherent public good of their data products.
 
Though I had many other "impressions," I did have one over
riding concern, particularly as I stood before this group
of federal, state and local bureaucrats, and private sector
information vendors (about 700 all together), and promoted
libraries as a wide spread, free to the public access point to
spatial data.  My concern was that I might be stretching the truth as to
what libraries can deliver.  I know that quite a few libraries are
effectively dealing with electronic products, and that several ARL
libraries are having great success with spatial data products such
as ArcView.  Yet at the same time many of us are struggling to keep
afloat simply providing service on the handful of Census and BEA
CDs that have come as depository items.  So my concern was that
perhaps I was pushing too hard for libraries generally -- sort of
making promises I'm not always convinced we can keep.
 
Personally, I sincerely hope that libraries can adjust to
accommodate the sort of data that will be available through the
National Spatial Data Infrastructure.  Again, the ARL/GIS project
suggests that we can.  I hope but am not convinced
that all libraries will make the significant steps they must to be
capable of dealing with large bodies of electronic
information -- spatial or whatever.
 
Yet my gut level faith that libraries will respond to the
new information environment kept me lobbying for libraries
as primary access points to electronic information such as
mapping data.  I sincerely believe that as librarians we
must work with electronic information or we are short
shrifting our clients -- and for some reason assume most of us feel
that way.  We see many obstacles, but they are there to overcome
rather than give in to.  And there's also the reality, of
course, that if we don't take the tiger by the tail someone else
will and our lot will be to sit on storehouses of
paper and fiche documents that will become increasingly less
mainstream.  We'll be on the information periphery.
 
        **********Commentary**********
Here, Duncan went on to expand on the role that GPO and Depository
Libraries can play in providing access and organization to spatial data.
All in all, it sounded like a most provocative conference!
--RJM