Library IT Task Force Open Forum Dec. 4, 2008

Library IT Task Force Open ForumDec. 4, 2008

Library Strategies

1890’s Library Reading Room1899 – 10,056 volumes

Colorado State University Libraries -2008

Over 2 million volumes in four locations

Increased use of digital content and decreasing use of print.

Print Collection

Library Challenges

Morgan Library regular shelves are over capacity and bound journal shelves are 80% capacity

Lake St. Depository shelves are at capacity Increasing demand for digital content

Required Storage Space

FY09 - Space needed for 110,000 volumes FY10-FY15 – Each year the Library collection

will grow approximately 20,000 volumes.

Storage and Maintenance Costs

Offsite Storage Option

$1 million one time construction and $500,000 annual for staffing and transportation

Onsite Storage Option

FY08 CSU Building Costs - $350-450 square foot.

Sustainability Plan

By maximizing storage space in current facilities resources can be used for more electronic resources rather than building and staffing new large storage facilities.

1. Install additional compact shelving and build small addition at the Lake St. Depository

2. Decrease print equivalents in the collection.

3. Purchase additional digital content.

Reduce Need for Storage Purchase Government Document electronic collections and

remove print equivalentsSpace for 60,000 books

Remove print indexes duplicated by electronic databasesSpace for 15,000 books

Remove bound journals duplicated by electronic journal subscriptions.

Space for 150,000 books

Increasing digital content decreases future storage requirements

Faculty and Graduate Student Survey Responses

3. Do you support removing selected print indexes …?      

No 3.30% 46

Yes 95.50% 1322

1.20% 17

Total     1,385

Yes, except for the following title(s):

Comments: Removing Print Indexes.

If I understand this question you are asking that if you have it electronically, do I support getting rid of hard copies. In every case, I will always prefer electronic copies.

I'm fairly old school, I like having a physical copy and there is always a chance of system failure, but I do see the wisdom in freeing up the space.

But, isn't there a reserve somewhere that we can store old books? Or does "removing these physical indexes" mean they would be permanently unavailable?

It is hard to believe that the indexes alone will take the same space as 10K books. You mean the old bound volumes?

Please try to sell these volumes or donate to small, struggling libraries, especially those in disadvantaged areas of our country, or to third-world countries allied to the U.S.

All Master of Fine Arts thesis abstracts should be kept on shelves.

Survey Responses

4. Do you support removing duplicate copies of books and U.S. Government Documents?      

No 11.50% 152

Yes 83.90% 1111

4.60% 61

Total     1,324

Yes, except for the following title(s):

Comments: Do you support removing duplicate books and U.S. Government Documents? Keep duplicate books in high traffic subject

areas. Keep duplicates in subject areas core to CSU

such as agriculture and natural resources. There are some duplicate titles of which there

is quite a bit of demand. Don't eliminate the second copy if it is frequently used.

This is a more complicated decision. There is rationale for maintaining multiple physical copies of materials in high demand.

Survey Responses

6. Do you support removing selected print journals …?      

No 10.90% 147

Yes 86.60% 1165

2.50% 34

Total     1,346

Yes, except for the following title(s):

Comments: Removing Print Journals.

I strongly agree with this. I never access any journal in the library that is available online.

If this includes old magazines, are full pages scanned, or just articles reprinted? It is important to be able to see all the content, Advertisements and images are significant sources of information…

Not all older journals are available electronically. If all older journals were available electronically I would support their removal.

As long as we have access to the electronic versions of the journals, I support removing the hard copies. I see how removing the old print journals will save space in the library, but how does removing the old print journals save money that can be used to purchase additional electronic content?

Many of the articles from these journals are likely available for free on PubMed

Comments: Removing Print Journal Equivalents of Electronic Journals. This should only be done title by title, with the

subject librarian making the choice. I support this with a yes ONLY if the

appropriate disciplines are given the opportunity to keep the journals in their respective departments.

Is it possible to make such journals available to faculty before they are disposed of?

Caution. We learned from Apollo 13 not to totally depend on technology, and some kind of back-up access should be ensured.

Independent Electronic ArchivesPortico and LOCKSS

Portico serves as a permanent archive for electronic journals, electronic books and digital newspapers.

LOCKSS provides software that allows commercially published digital content to be stored locally.

Questions and Comments

Information on the Library IT Task Force - http://lib.colostate.edu/about/goals/it/