CDL: Disposal of Abstracts and Indexes (responses 1-3)

See the original posting in the archives:
   http://serials.infomotions.com/colldv-l/archive/2008/200801/0025.html

==1==

Subject: Re: CDL-Disposal of Abstracts and Indexes
From: Marty Jenkins <martin.jenkins_at_wright.edu>

Jack, et al.
We pretty much gutted our Abs/Ins section about 4 years ago, mostly in 
order to repurpose the space. For a number of these sources, OhioLINK 
has actually bought the data, so even if the new stream goes away, we 
don't have to worry about what we've already bought digitally. Many 
others are so basic that we would be just as reluctant to cancel the 
online as we would have been to cancel the print 20 years ago. At some 
point, the philosophy had to become that the space was too valuable to 
be used for storing stuff we *might* need *someday* *just in case*.

Cheers,
Martin Jenkins
Head, Technical Services
Wright State University Libraries
3640 Col. Glenn Hwy
Dayton OH 45435
martin.jenkins_at_wright.edu  (937)775-4983

==2==

From:
Steven Harris <SteHar_at_library.lib.usu.edu>

We moved into a new building a couple of years ago.  As part of that 
move we tried to reduce the physical footprint of reference. We 
subscribed, as much as possible, to electronic versions of all our 
indexes and abstracts. We kept backfiles but moved them into our 
automated storage.  Some things we just canceled altogether. There are 
still a couple of titles we get in print, but generally speaking, the 
move to electronic has worked pretty well. Nobody misses the print.

We also tried to work out a distributed print repository for JSTOR 
titles with our multi-state library consortium.  We spent many years 
crafting an agreement and deciding who would keep which journals, in 
an effort to maintain at least one print copy in the consortium. It 
was quite a headache.  When Portico and other electronic archiving 
models came along, everyone lost interest in our state project. It 
kind of died on the vine.  I think many libraries in the consortium 
have gone ahead with discarding bound volumes of JSTOR titles without 
regard for the agreement.  If you are going to set up any kind of 
distributed plan, I would suggest moving quickly and being as nimble 
as possible.  Don't spend a lot of time fussing about the details. 
You may find it a waste of effort. On an institutional level, we still 
haven't established good criteria for these decisions at my library.

--Steven Harris
    Collection Development Librarian
    Utah State University
    Our automated storage:
    http://library.usu.edu/main/library_information/barncam.php


==3==

From:
Linwood DeLong <linwood.delong_at_uwinnipeg.ca>

A very interesting question.   We are retaining our older issues of 
print indexes, such as Social Sciences Index and Humanities Index, 
because some of the information contained there is not always found in 
other indexes.

Having decided to cancel print subscriptions to indexes such as 
Sociological Abstracts, MLA Bibliography, etc., we have more or less 
committed ourselves, in perpetuity, to keeping the online versions of 
these.

I would admit that our print indexes are now very infrequently used 
and that students are starting to assume that the only indexes worth 
consulting are the online ones.

We are discarding print issues of journals that are in JSTOR, but only 
after we compare numerous samples from the original with the version 
in JSTOR.   Although the reproduction of images in JSTOR is 
impressive, we have occasionally noticed that color illustrations, 
maps, diagrams, etc. did not reproduce as well as we had hoped in 
JSTOR and, where circumstances warrant,  we are keeping the print 
originals.

Linwood DeLong
University of Winnipeg Library




Linwood DeLong
Collections Coordinator
University of Winnipeg Library
515 Portage Ave.
Winnipeg, MB, Canada
R3B 2E9

Ph. 204-786-9124
FAX  204-786-1824
e-mail:  l.delong_at_uwinnipeg.ca