--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 09:46:57 -0500
From: Tsering Wangyal Shawa <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: DOQQs of California
Sender: Tsering Wangyal Shawa <[log in to unmask]>



I like to thank Mary Larsgaard for sharing information about why the ADL
can not share their DOQQ of California free to non-UC libraries. I totally
understand her argument of why they are doing this. Since all DOQQ of
California were purchased and they need to recover their expanses therefore
they are charging a fee to non-UC libraries. This sound very logical.
However, the problem in following this trend is that we will be forced to
buy these materials from the USGS or other commercial companies every five
years or so when they take a new aerial photo of different parts of the
country to update their USGS topos. And if their students and faculty
members need other states DOQQ then they will be force to pay.

Do we want to go along this path? Or do we want to form a strategy to find
a solution to get this important material free to all the FDLP. Initially
these materials were supposed to be delivered free but because of various
excuses the USGS made now they seems to have changed their policy of giving
these material free to FDLP rather they want to recover MONEY (whose money)
by selling them to commercial companies and they in turn sale these
materials to us. Do we want to fall in this trap?

I understand that it is important for an individual librarian to lobby
their legislator about the said issue however, I feel that we as group
should form one voice and push and lobby the USGS or any concern
institutions about getting DOQQ free again to all the FDLP. If we can't
address these issues then what is the use of forming various interest
groups or organisation like MAGERT, GODORT, etc.

My whole question of rising the issue of DOQQ business was to make other
librarians think critically about setting a trend in buying DOQQ from the
USGS and then selling them to other libraries. How long you can do this?
Let me close my comments by using Mary statement about a digital
library....."the realities of building and maintaining a digital library,
which as nearly as I can tell costs more, not less, than building and
maintaining a hardcopy collection".

Thanks.
-Wangyal
Tsering Wangyal Shawa
Geographic Information Systems Librarian
Digital Map and Geospatial Information Center
Geosciences and Map Library
Guyot Hall, Princeton University
Princeton, NJ 08544
Phone: (609) 258-6804
Fax: (609) 258-4607
www.princeton.edu/~geolib/gis

  At 04:33 PM 3/9/01 -0500, Johnnie Sutherland wrote:
>--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
>Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 11:13:05 -0800
>From: Mary Larsgaard <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: DOQQs of California
>Sender: Mary Larsgaard <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>Certainly, we would all very much appreciate it
>if USGS would have the funding to provide libraries
>with the DOQQs as a depository item, and I do
>encourage you to let your legislators know that
>USGS is an important agency whose products
>are of great use to the taxpayers, and that these
>products should be provided as part of the
>of the depository-library system.
>Just recently, I saw an email that - if I'm
>remembering correctly - stated that USGS
>is looking at cuts in its budget for upcoming years.
>
>That having been said - the charges that
>my department has for providing DOQQs to
>non-UC libraries is a reflection of the realities of building and
>maintaining a digital library, which as nearly
>as I can tell costs more, not less, than building
>and maintaining a hardcopy collection.
>To date, the UC/Stanford map libraries (several of us
>are putting our money together to buy these)
>have invested about $22,000 over the past
>2 years or so, and we still have about
>15% or so of the state left to purchase.
>
>
>Mary
--- End Forwarded Message ---