-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Selection/Retention of Cartographic Materials in a Museum Setting
Date:   Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:19:12 -0500
From:   Paige Andrew <[log in to unmask]>
To:     [log in to unmask]




All,

I am forwarding the following messages on behalf of Suzanne Pilsk,
Cataloging Librarian at the Smithsonian Institution Libraries. She
originally posted this to the OLAC listserv and I suggested MAPS-L as a
broader audience with the potential for more feedback. Thanks go to
those who have already replied to her original message (you know who you
are) and my apologies if some of you have seen this already. I will
first post Suzanne's original message, then follow with an expanded
explanation and outcomes that Suzanne sent to me personally. To further
elucidate Suzanne's institutional situation if you haven't been
lucky/honored/blessed enough to actually tour some of the Smithsonian's
"behind the scenes" collections and units -- there are research
collections used primarily by Smithsonian researchers/experts either
in-house or in the field, and then there are collections that support
the huge variety of museums that are run by the Smithsonian. Please take
note of this while reading Suzanne's further explanations/needs below, AND,

/Please respond to Suzanne offlist at [log in to unmask]

/Sincerely,

Paige

_Original Message

_
>> Help needed on criteria of selection and retention of
>> maps/cartographic materials:
>>
>> Does anyone have any policies or standards they are willing to share
>> with us one the decisions used for collecting/retaining and
>> culling/weeding of map collections?
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Suzanne

_Followup Message/Explanation

_The issues at hand are the role of keeping and culling/weeding of maps.
An additional layers is that we are working with the museum collections
- so if there is any advise on what might be deemed not necessary to
keep in the museum collection side of things but would benefit the
library - Does that make any sense?

So far we have a draft collecting/collections standard that includes:

Important for use by the research department currently owning the map:

    * Maps that have been hand drawn, annotated or enhanced in a way
      related to the department’s mission (e.g., maps showing collection
      routes or sites).
    * Maps of areas of extensive collection that are contemporary with
      the time of collection, especially if that portion of the
      collection needs refinement of collection site information.
    * Relatively recent maps of areas where new research / collection is
      expected to occur. These might be taken into the field by
      researchers or used in planning.
    * Other maps determined important to be easily accessible by
      department staff.

Important for another research department:

    * Maps that might be more useful in another department (e.g., a
      vegetation map in IZ’s collection).


Maps to be retained for other purposes:

    * Maps that might be used in future exhibits. This should be looked
      at from an SI-wide perspective.
    * Maps that are relatively rare or especially nice visually.
    * Maps that could be used to fill out a collection. E.g., someone
      might determine that a collection of gasoline company roadmaps
      might be useful for institutional purposes. Or, a USGS quad that
      fills in a gap.

Maps that should not be retained by the institution:

    * More than 2(?) copies of maps that aren’t exceptional.
    * Copies of unexceptional maps that are in poor condition. i.e., the
      cost / effort to conserve them is more than their worth.
    * Do we need to retain any base / outline maps? Perhaps only one copy?