MAPPING OUR COLLECTIONS October 2012

Report prepared by the NSLA Maps Project Group Project Managers: Maggie Patton, State Library of New South Wales Martin Woods, National Library of Australia

Mapping Our Collections by National and State Libraries Australasia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License CONTENTS Background 3

1. Reporting and statistics 3 2. Collection growth 4 2.1 Collecting policies and practice 4 2.2 Government deposit 5 2.3 Non-government deposit 5 2.4 Purchased acquisitions 6 2.5 Donations 6 2.6 Collection overlap and collaboration 6 3. Collection description 6

3.1 Cataloguing practice 6 3.2 Supplementary practices 7 3.3 Content and discovery 7

4. Series mapping 8

4.1 Nature and extent of holdings 8 4.2 Control and access 9

5. Disposal 9 6. Managing backlogs 10 7. Maps in digital format 11

7.1 Collection policy and practice 11 7.2 Control and access 11

8. Collection guides 12 9. Physical infrastructure 12

9.1 Storage facilities 12 9.2 Housing and handling 13

10. Access to maps 14 10.1 Digitisation 14 10.2 Onsite delivery models and requesting 14 11. Professional development and communication 15

11.1 Staff development 15 11.2 Formal education 16 11.3 Communication 16

RECOMMENDATIONS 16

Background In February 2012 the NSLA Executive endorsed the establishment of the NSLA Maps Project. The project group aimed to provide base line data for comparison of activities across NSLA libraries; identify key issues affecting the development and management of map collections; and propose a series of recommendations for improved processes and services. In June 2012 a draft survey was circulated to project members for comment and clarification. In August of that year, a workshop was held at the State Library of New South Wales to discuss the outcomes of the survey and develop a number of key statements and recommendations for consideration by NSLA. Present at the workshop were representatives from  National Library of Australia  Northern Territory Library Service  State Library of New South Wales  State Library of Queensland  State Library of Victoria  State Library of Western Australia  NSLA Project Office Below are the key findings and recommendations from the survey data and discussions at the Workshop.

1. Reporting and Statistics There is a general lack of consistent data to assist with Map collection management and to usefully compare activities across NSLA Libraries. For example, there is considerable variety in the way in which libraries report acquisition and processing of maps, and a degree of ‘guesstimation’ underpinning most collection figures. Only a few libraries undertake regular stocktakes or have completed drawer counts to provide base data for planning map activities or to gain knowledge around the physical condition of the collections. The inconsistency in data collection is demonstrated in the range of responses to the question - What is the estimated size of your hard copy map collection? The responses included ‘150,000 sheets’, ‘Between 2,000 and 2,500 items’, ‘62,000 maps and atlases (not globes)’, ‘60 shelf metres approximately’. Only 20% were ‘very confident’ of their response. The tallies were derived from a range of approaches including  Physical map count, catalogue searches and some estimations.  Based on adding annual totals to a figure first obtained from old annual reports for the library, we have 327 catalogued maps; approximately 1000 recently (in the last fortnight) deposited aerial maps; approximately 1000 uncatalogued maps deposited in December 2011 (estimate based on average no. maps per cm x height of pile in cm)  1000 cabinets/units x 10 drawers ea x 100 maps per/drawer  A drawer count was undertaken c. 2002, along with addition of annual stats for acquisitions and donations Rather like archival collections maps may be catalogued individually, may be part of a large series or are contained within an archival collection with minimal description, providing little indication of sheet numbers. One library noted: ‘Limitation is that the majority of archival record groups are not catalogued to piece level, and not all record groups have series listings.’

Collecting and comparing client inquiries is also complex due to the variety of arrangements around service delivery. Map inquiries can range from requests for a known item to complex inquiries involving a range of maps, to any general inquiry which has a place or spatial aspect. Inquiries may be handled by map specialists or by general staff with limited knowledge of map collections. Not all libraries keep separate statistics on map inquiries and the complexity of inquiries is underestimated. Recommendation A standard set of map statistics is required to assist in collection management and advocacy around map collections. Set up a subgroup to investigate statistics currently collected, analyse gaps and possible solutions. The group could also investigate the use of Reftracker to collect comparative statistics on inquiries. Action Nominations required to participate in the working group

2. Collection growth 2.1 Collecting policies and practice The survey indicated considerable variation in collection size across collections, from less than 2500 up to over a million items held. The overwhelming majority are printed maps collections. No library is certain of total map numbers. Methods of providing these figures were estimates, either derived from adding annual figures to previously estimated baselines, or figures based on a survey of average number per drawer. The degree to which maps were included within library Collection Development Policies was highly variable, from brief generic mentions to detailed specifications of map collecting practice. Overall, collection growth, like the relative sizes and budgets of the collections surveyed, was also variable. All but one of the libraries reported one staff person or less dedicated to map acquisition responsibilities. Aerial photographs, though not identified in the survey preparation phase and therefore not specified for responses, were nevertheless raised as significant map related material for several libraries surveyed. These tend to be counted at box level or by meterage, with very limited online access.

As aerial photographs are attracting greater user interest there may be value in scoping what libraries hold, how they are managed and made accessible.

All but one library reported over 50% of its maps collection as comprising maps relating to its home territory. Six respondents reported that maps relating to ‘other states or territories’ make up less than 25%, with three of these reporting less than 15%. Seven libraries reported that ‘Overseas’ maps make up less than 15% of their total holdings, and of these five reported less than 10% as Overseas. In terms of collecting intentions for these categories, while all reported the intention to continue collecting printed maps relating to their state or territory, only four considered they would be collecting Australian maps not related to their state or territory, or overseas mapping. NLNZ reported it would no longer be collecting large scale Australian or UK mapping, particularly that available in digital format. All libraries reported that maps in digital format currently make up less than 5% of map holdings while eight libraries considered they would continue to collect in this category. [See also the later section devoted to Digital format.] Rare and significant are reported at 15% or less of total for all but one library, with all collecting such heritage materials.

It is possible that ‘Rare and significant’ may require definitional discussion, as the line is drawn several ways.

In terms of recent acquisition (past three reporting years), there is a great deal of variation evident both year to year and across libraries, presumably dependant on local factors. It is noticeable that in the past three years there has been a decrease in libraries acquiring less than 100 maps per annum, so that in 2011/12 there was only one library in this category, with a commensurate increase in libraries collecting 201-500 or more maps per annum. It was notable that only 20% of libraries are ‘certain’ of their annual acquisition numbers for maps over the past three years, including 2011/12. Of the four nominated categories for acquisition – donations (46%) and government deposit (32%) made up the lion’s share. Most responses were in the range of 20-30% Government deposit as a percentage of total acquisition, with SLWA exceptional at 75%. Donations were more variable, with NT and ACT having almost all maps donated, NLA, SLSA and SLV approx 63% donated, SLNSW and NLNZ approx 25-30% donated. SLQ indicated 5% donated and SLWA 10%. Non-government legal deposit (18%) was highly variable across libraries, with SLV, SLNSW and SLQ indicating 25-30% total acquisition in this category, while SLSA, SLWA, NLA, and SLWA around 15% each. TAHO indicated 100% ‘Donation’; however this was an interpretation of government deposit. Of overall relevance, only two libraries indicated a reduction in acquisition growth over the past 10 years, with two reporting ‘no change’. To put it in the positive, eight of the libraries reported no change or an increase in map acquisition over this period. Three libraries reported increases of over 50% in the past three years. It was expected that results might show that the advent of digital mapping would exert downward pressure on paper map acquisition, however this doesn’t seem to be borne out by the figures. There may be specific reasons such as absorption of special map library collections (and subsequent redistribution of maps); however no single overriding reason emerged during the Workshop.

The trend to digital mapping while affecting certain categories of maps doesn’t yet seem to have exerted significant downward pressure on acquisition of printed mapping.

2.2 Government Deposit Government deposit was the second largest category of collecting activity, comprising about 40% across all libraries. Each library reported receipt of materials via government deposit mechanisms. As for the other map acquisition categories, most libraries are somewhat unsure of receiving government deposit consistently as there is minimal resourcing to check receipt of materials. Several indicated using Libraries Australia’s reporting functionality to generate reports of material added to LA (but not received by them). However even the larger state libraries were only moderately confident of receiving all government deposit entitlements, with little time for checking. By contrast, NLNZ and LINC were sure that this was occurring due to dedicated arrangements in their jurisdictions. Over half of respondents reported a decrease in government mapping over the past five years, while one third stated it had ‘stayed the same’. In terms of expectation more libraries felt government mapping would increase. The Workshop discussion indicated some of this expectation reflected lack of information from government agencies about future deposit, especially in terms of digital mapping. The Northern Territory exemption of spatial data specifically may provide a useful model for other NSLA libraries. The NT Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004, “Exemption of spatial information” exempts deposit of mapping “generated by dynamic spatial databases for a specific use or purpose unless that use or purpose involves distribution”.

2.3 Non-government deposit Non-government deposit made up approximately 18% of acquisition averaged across all libraries. Confidence in receipt of maps in this category was low compared with Government mapping. One third of respondents were ‘not confident’ of the ability to anticipate or check annual intake in this category and 5 the remainder only moderately confident. As for Government maps, several libraries indicated making use of Libraries Australia’s reporting functionality, but with no follow up possible. The overwhelming majority of libraries reported that their Non-government deposit mapping acquisition levels have stayed approximately the same in the past 5 years, though this could reflect uncertainty about categorization, or checking methodology, or statistics generally. The volume of Digital mapping was insignificant in this collecting category. 2.4 Purchased acquisitions Seven libraries reported a budget for purchased acquisition of maps. Budgets are highly variable between libraries, but mostly stable year to year, and most libraries anticipated the level of acquisition funding would continue at more or less current levels. Libraries doing purchased acquisition reported employing similar methods of keeping in touch with the marketplace, and generally seemed to inform other libraries if considering material that may be relevant to others. Several libraries maintain mailing and contact lists for map suppliers. SLSA reported making use of the National Library's new acquisitions via the ‘new items’ option in the NLA catalogue. 2.5 Donations Donations represented the largest category, slightly more than Government deposit overall. Four libraries reported receiving less than 200 donations last year, the remainder over 200. Nearly all reported that the level of donations had increased or stayed the same over the past five years (and expected this would continue to do so). Most libraries don't specifically target community-level groups. 2.6 Collection overlap and collaboration Excluding ‘rare’ or ‘heritage’ collecting, most of the project members indicated a strong preference for ‘state-first’ (ie local state or territory) collection-building. Maps are overwhelmingly printed collections, acquired (and disposed of) with an assumption of holdings ending at the border, with some regional exceptions. However a significant exception arises in regard to large Australian published topographic series (discussed further under “Series), many of which are held concurrently. Some duplication is necessary and inevitable, however the degree to which this occurs could be investigated. Recommendation The level of distributed collecting which already exists between institutions should be recognized as a strength. Action Project leaders to contribute project outcomes to the broader activities of the Collaborative Collection groups and the Australian Libraries Collaborative Collection (TALCC).

3. Collection description 3.1 Cataloguing practice Less than half the libraries reported ongoing cataloguing programs with availability of specialist map cataloguing staff, while several reported recent focused cataloguing projects which included maps. In terms of a cataloguing ‘model,’ the description or cataloguing of NSLA Map collections may be done as a dedicated team but was more likely part of team servicing other materials as well. As indicated under collection growth, intake of printed maps was little diminished despite some categories of maps being more with the digital realm. All but one of the libraries reported a large percentage of uncontrolled or under-controlled mapping (see also 6. Backlogs). Proportion of collections catalogued to some extent ranged from less than 20% to over 90%.

Map cataloguing in NSLA libraries may be described as episodic and inconsistent. The reputation of maps as “difficult to catalogue” is justified when the combination of text and imagery is considered, together with the need to add place and coordinate data to other cataloguing requirements. Availability of expertise is a key factor. There was a view that ‘it is difficult to get cataloguing staff to take on these very specialised materials’, and it was apparent in some libraries that map cataloguing expertise is scarce to non-existent. On the other hand there were examples of some innovative practice. Most libraries reported having a cataloguing policy or procedural tool to guide map cataloguing, however approaches to the challenges posed by maps were variable. Some libraries applied full MARC level records to categories of maps that others applied more basic level cataloguing to, perhaps enhanced with some additional geographical data. Of those libraries regularly cataloguing maps, all indicated they do one-for-one cataloguing (ie catalogue each item), and most libraries also create collection level records for series. In some cases, long held views that an emphasis on individual records provides better access has been extended to cataloguing of essentially similar maps within unified series (see 4. Series maps), possibly adding effort where on balance it is not needed. Nearly all libraries reported full level individual cataloguing of maps for ‘Your state’ and for ‘Rare or significant’, however ‘Other state’ records were created at basic, medium or full level. ‘Overseas maps’ and ‘Maps in digital format’ were additional points of variation, with approximately one-third of libraries creating basic level records, while the balance created enhanced or full records. In regard to digital mapping, most catalogued at carrier-level, where the maps contained are not being catalogued individually, nor additional metadata sourced. Six libraries reported cataloguing maps in books, though this was on a case by case basis. Most libraries reported creating individual catalogue records for maps found in manuscript or archival collections. This is done selectively, and the decision to do so was usually with the archival or manuscript area, with cataloguing done by archival staff. In some cases these maps remained in the archival collections (particularly if the maps were annotated or fully manuscript), though in others both published and manuscript items were transferred to the maps area. Where item level cataloguing occurred, there was usually a link provided from the map record to the manuscript record. 3.2 Supplementary practices Several libraries reported some use of volunteers or students to supplement existing map cataloguing resources and projects. In most cases the work addresses specialist works where a volunteer has particular knowledge, or for describing large sequences of material that would otherwise remain unlisted. Projects have included template-based cataloguing of sheets in atlases, listing maps and aerial photographs in spreadsheets for later loading onto catalogues, adding coordinates to records, creating formed collection lists etc. In each case the targeted utilisation of volunteers or students has led to a marked increase in control and discoverability of maps. Volunteer-focused effort while effective, is quite small scale and limited by availability of volunteers to map areas and staff availability to supervise. Take up of volunteers or students was high in three libraries (SLSA, NLA and SLNSW), and low (less than 5 hours per month) or absent in the others. SLSA, SLNSW and NLA alone have explored tools that might import metadata to catalogues as an alternative to traditional cataloguing, however there are no operational workflows of this type [see also Series maps]. 3.3 Content and discovery Most libraries contribute the majority of their map catalogue records to Libraries Australia. Other than TAHO most are fully AACR2 and several indicated they will be adopting RDA. One library reported no 7 loading of map records to LA due to technical issues. Another reported that due to some standards issues for maps records, there may be instances of by-passing Libraries Australia and adding directly to Trove some ‘sub-standard’ records that Libraries Australia won’t accept. There was a split in terms of collection organisation between Boggs & Lewis and LC. Most also use running numbers for certain categories. An emerging issue is the question of how end-users, particularly those intending to locate maps via location, or use maps in GIS systems, can utilize MARC records to identify maps consistently across libraries or incorporate them effectively. Most map staff indicated 4-point coordinates were needed whenever possible however they were inconsistently applied for a variety of reasons. Added to this, inconsistency in applying ‘Basic, ‘Medium’, or ‘Full’ level of cataloguing, and when to individually catalogue or when to create a collection level record may be complicating access and discovery. Most libraries applied Library of Congress Subject Headings and genre and form terms. In terms of controlled vocabularies, most used Geoscience Australia’s Gazetteer. NLNZ uses Land Information New Zealand, as well as LCSH and Maori SH developed in-house. Discussion revealed that there is considerable inconsistency of taxonomy in GA’s gazetteer tool, which is a consolidation of state by state Geographic Names Board information. Consequently most Australian libraries also make attempts to contact the names boards to supplement this information. Local options also included:  Cartographic Materials Standard (2010)-local manual WA Place Names  SA Government (Dept. of Environment, Water and Natural Resources) gazetteer, Placenames Online. Recommendation A subgroup to be formed to identify basic cataloguing elements required for maps cataloguing and share this standard metadata with the group. The group would investigate the most effective tool for the application of coordinates. It was also agreed that members would share spreadsheets and any other templates utilised for specific map cataloguing projects. Essential elements for inclusion in the metadata related to digital images should also be considered by the group. Action Members to place appropriate documents in the shared NSLA project space. Nominations required to participate in the working group and identify tools and guidelines which may already exist for re use.

4. Series mapping 4.1 Nature and extent of holdings Maps in series are generally groups of maps with a common publisher, purpose, scale and format across a prescribed area. Series may range from a few maps to many hundreds, even thousands. Most libraries reported significant holdings of maps in series form. In four libraries these maps comprise over 50% of their collections, while for seven libraries the proportion indicated was over 30%. Major national series, ie those produced by Geoscience, National Mapping and its antecedents from the 1920s – present, are held in common across most libraries. Other than SLSA, no usage statistics were available to indicate frequency of access to other than local state or territory. SLSA indications were that usage outside state boundaries (and certain identifiable overlapping regions) was very low. It is possible that the Australian NSLA libraries could consider retention of only smaller scale topographic mapping for other than state of origin, retaining not larger than 1:250,000 scale for other states. All states and territories also retain various land-use and planning series produced by state departments and other agencies.

4.2 Control and access All libraries are acquainted with the concept of cataloguing at series or collection level and providing access via series indexes or descriptive lists. This is an approach almost universal in specialist map libraries. In describing and making series maps available, while most libraries use indexes or lists, these are overwhelmingly onsite only. The NLA has recently moved to cataloguing overseas series maps and all new Australian series at collection or series level only. Index sheets which indicate holdings are then attached to the online record to allow requesting. Alternatively the series level record may be bolstered by extensive notes and holdings information. SLSA has also made some moves towards access through online indexes, and NLNZ indicated that many graphical indexes will be coming online with the NZMS digitization project. SLWA commented that the library prefers to create collection level records where possible (with content notes) as a time-saver, and this was referred to as a current or future priority approach by others. In describing and making series maps available, almost all use series indexes or descriptive lists, however these are overwhelmingly in paper form, requiring onsite visits or reference enquiries to discover holdings. Other than the NLA (which has recently converted over 800 series indexes to graphic files and loaded these to its catalogue and Trove), no other library has created online indexes in significant numbers. Reasons cited for this included:  Not given a high priority given that hard copy indexes are currently well used locally;  Lack of time, technology, infrastructure and staffing;  Not a clearly defined option in terms of resourcing and competing priorities;  Lack of systems support (e.g. automation of file processing, database expertise);  Scanning issues, legibility and/or data quality issues;  Poor quality of original maps, difficult to source good quality base maps;  Variability of how holdings have been marked up on paper indexes over time;  Time and expertise available to create graphical indexes, and many series are not catalogued. SLSA reported that volunteers have been recording data for individual sheets (including bounding coordinates and other geospatial reference data) to add the potential of ‘active’ delivery of digitised series maps through graphic indexes. NLA reported trialing GIS software to deliver indexes, however nothing as yet implemented in either case. Six libraries reported having descriptive lists (text) online as an adjunct to the record. Recommendation Member Libraries were interested in the approach taken by the NLA including the process for using graphic software (eg Photoshop) to populate a blank index sheet which can then be attached to a series level record. If required NSLA could be approached to support a workshop on series cataloguing for NSLA members. Action Brendan Whyte (NLA) to document the process he uses for Series mapping including the use of graphical software to update holdings, and where and how to source the index sheets.

5. Disposal Few respondents were aware of map-specific disposal policies although most libraries have general disposal policies. Most libraries reported some avenues for map disposal although there were major variations in capacity and volume disposed of year to year and few reported a routine disposal program. Only one library indicated any specific forward planning in this area, noting: The current review of published collections sheet mapping aims at deaccessioning with a view to eventual disposal of up to 50% of the [non-state] map series and 70% of the [non- 9

state] single issue maps. This program is due to end in 2014. It is planned that the remaining [non-state] sheet mapping will be reviewed again commencing approx. 2018 The most common reason for disposal was the demand for space and storage and in some cases the need to remove maps from open access due to proposed changes to client services. Several libraries have used targeted weeding projects to discard duplicates, or ‘out of date’ mapping. Many have discarded before accessioning. When material was disposed the majority were from unwanted donations, approximately 65%. The level of disposal activity is dependent upon the availability of staff resources and the availability of easy disposal methods. Some libraries will offer unwanted material to their local community or public library network. A number of libraries including SLSA, SLNSW and NLA have used email lists such as ANZMapS to advertise material for distribution. This is a growing trend and regular notifications of maps for disposal are advertised from both Australian and overseas libraries on a variety of lists and email services. It was generally acknowledged that although checking the holdings of other libraries is much easier due to the increase in online records the task of checking to identify potential institutions who may be interested in collecting material is time consuming and resources are therefore not available for targeted disposal. Discussions at the workshop acknowledged that The Australian Libraries Collaborative Collection (TALCC) provides a means for NSLA members to collaborate by relocating low use materials to other participating libraries across Australasia in accordance with their identified collection strengths and obligations to collect and retain Statiana and other legislated responsibilities. Recommendation That all libraries use the processes identified through TALCC to offer and claim material. That the Maps sub-group assists in developing a communication plan for disposal processing across categories of maps. Action Representative to look at the TALCC agreement and circulate the key processes developed for offering resources to other libraries including responsibility for transport costs and transfer of ownership.

6. Managing backlogs The survey indicated that seven out of ten libraries had backlogs of well over a thousand items and the libraries with considerable backlogs believed it would take at least four years to clear unless special projects or additional resources were provided. As one library observed, clearing a backlog ‘is very slow work, as each map has to be checked against the catalogue, then physically checked against the collection copy - as there are often minor variants etc.’ Another library suggested that many maps would be duplicates or out-of-scope maps – emphasizing the importance of an effective disposal policy. Another observation was that backlogs often remained hidden until another project such as digitisation was initiated. Hidden backlogs often occur when basic records are created for large deposits on arrival but no follow on resources are provided to fully assess, list and describe the content. In 2010/11 SLWA undertook a project to clear their map backlog. This was achieved by providing additional resources over a 12-month period including approximately 3.5 FTE for description and access, 1 FTE for accessioning/processing and 2-3 FTE stock management staff to support the project. The survey and workshop revealed considerable ingenuity among those managing map collections in developing short-term and low-impact projects to reduce accessioning or cataloguing backlogs. A number of libraries use volunteers or students to complete spreadsheets listing sufficient details for a basic record which is later uploaded to the catalogue. Larger collections were managed by creating content lists which could be linked to the main record.

Two other significant points were raised. There is little recognition that bringing backlogs online increases demand and the need for additional resources for access and retrieval is unlikely to be met. The backlog of maps in a digital format is of equal concern to physical backlogs. Clearing these backlogs will require technical solutions as well as staff resources. Recommendation As the provision of additional resources was unlikely members would share successful approaches to managing backlogs including templates for spreadsheets and programs for volunteers and students. Action Members to place appropriate documents and project plans in the shared NSLA project area.

7. Maps in digital format 7. 1 Collection policy and practice Some digital mapping comprises simple PDF or image files in place of previously issued printed maps. However increasingly many mapping products are complex compilations of images, software and databases, which require specialist software to operate and manage. Many digital maps released by government departments provided equivalent data and mapping on several software bases, reflecting the needs of the GIS user community. The extent of holdings proved difficult to ascertain. While four libraries reported having a collection of over 100 carriers, some were unsure of their holdings. However most libraries reported that they collect a variety of digital mapping on physical carriers. Northern Territory is exempted from collecting most born digital mapping via The NT Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004, “Exemption of spatial information”. Several libraries reported maps in digital format were not specified in their CDP, although they may be included in general intentions. There was considerable variation in what is collected, and attitudes to disposal. Among those indicating some policy scoping in regard to digital collecting, few could provide documentation stipulating reasoning for inclusions and exclusions, though NLA and SLV had established committees to work on born digital collecting and preservation across a range of collections. Most libraries did not report a digital mapping disposal policy. The NLA, an early adopter of collecting digital mapping, reported disposal of out of scope overseas and some Australian GIS material. There is a concurrent concern among those managing map collections about the digital preservation policies of government map producers, and ongoing access to born digital mapping. This concern is perhaps promoting collection of items that are retained in other government agencies while presenting significant access challenges in NSLA libraries. 7.2 Control and access In addition to complexity of the materials themselves, there were general concerns about effective recording and cataloguing of digital mapping. Project members were concerned that the complexity of digital mapping and consequent implications of collection and delivery was not fully appreciated by libraries. Many digital items present difficulties at the point of acquisition, and cataloguing is inconsistently applied. Few libraries indicated they provide a catalogue relationship between maps in digital format and their print predecessors. Most libraries recorded acquisition and cataloguing at carrier level only, due in part to the inability to open carriers, making identification problematic for clients. Only two NSLA libraries reported that they maintained some of the specialist software required to read specialist GIS-based digital mapping. The Northern Territory legislation exempts the NTLIS from collecting spatial information that is derived from dynamic spatial databases for a specific technical use, unless that use or purpose involves distribution. The Department responsible for mapping within the Northern Territory Government provides NTLIS with the electronic links to the dynamic data and hardcopies as requested.

Recommendation Set up a subgroup to develop an agreed position regarding acquisition of digital mapping. Where possible, libraries require deposit or electronic links to mapping products that are publically accessible and which do not require specialist GIS software. Explore MOUs with government organisations producing digital mapping (perhaps initially with Geoscience Australia). This might include agreement to harvest all PDF products appropriate for each State /Territory from Geoscience Australia. Action Nominations required to participate in the working group. Refer outcomes to Digital Collecting Project.

8. Collection guides Seven out of ten libraries have guides to assist in accessing the collections. Five libraries provide online guides to their collections. The online guides available at the SLV and SLNSW use the popular Libguide software and SLSA reported that their guides were bring converted to the Libguide format. It was generally agreed that a shared guide could be developed on maps for Family History as this was a key repeatable area for inquiries and was sometimes overlooked in developing Family History capabilities The guide may need to be tailored for local mapping sources however it was agreed that search strategies and many mapping resources were common across the States, NZ and Territories. Recommendation Set up a subgroup to develop or share suitable guides or presentations on the use of maps for Family History. Action Nominations required to participate in the working group

9. Physical infrastructure 9.1 Storage facilities All libraries reported primary storage of maps in plan cabinets, together with a range of other storage methods for specific formats and purposes. In many cases shelving was rated as above 20-30 years old and in some cases onsite capacity had been reached, requiring offsite retrieval. Over time, map cabinets and compactus storage is subject to a significant amount of warping or distortion due to the large dimensions of map cabinets, and several libraries related instances of jammed or unusable drawers. Apart from occasional breakdowns of compactus units, this may contribute to significant Work Health & Safety issues. There was also general reporting of a lack of accepted standards for housing and storing map collections, beyond uniform recognition that large-format paper maps, plans and charts requiring long term retention should be stored flat on shelves or cabinets. More specific requirements may be necessary, with decisions about long term storage options based on usage and access requirements of particular parts of library map collections. Lack of standards - about type of cabinets or shelving used, numbers of maps per drawer, whether to folder or shelve loose etc - also contributes to an inability to estimate capacity requirements, especially where exact numbers of maps are unknown. Other map storage options included roll-racks, boxes and canisters for large rolled maps, shelving for related cartographic volumes, and large picture storage options for framed maps. Most libraries reported having some suitable workspace dedicated to the processing and management of map materials. While all libraries reported storing maps in plan cabinets, a high proportion (seven libraries) reported use of vertical shelving in some instances. Vertical cabinets, while useful for small numbers of reference maps, present long term problems such as distortion and damage to maps, and are more difficult to retrieve and reshelve accurately. Several libraries indicated a preference to move some of their vertically stored maps to plan cabinets, pending availability of resources to re-house them.

Comments on storage of rare maps again raised the question ‘what is a rare map? Criteria for defining rare or heritage maps are variable, but include valuation, rarity, date of publication, ‘pre-1900,’ cultural significance, fragility, antique, artistic value. However defined, most libraries provided additional security and climate control for this category. Management of rare or heritage maps generally require an added layer of housing/security and handling overheads, though this can be mitigated by digitisation. 9.2 Housing and handling As above, lack of standards about shelving and numbers of maps per drawer affect ability to estimate shelving needs over time. In addition, decisions made about whether to folder or shelve maps loose, etc, combined with retrieval of maps over time, contribute to preservation costs, retrieval delays and eventual loss of mapping. There was no identified standard applied to numbers or volume of maps in drawers, when or whether to house in folders, or protect in mylar. All libraries reported selective use of mylar to protect and handle maps, while some also grouped maps into folders. Over half the libraries reported a proportion of their collection was ‘loose’ in drawers. Other materials and methods included hanging strips for vertical storage, boxes and tubes, polypropylene, Tyvek, and bound folders. Though not specified in the survey, libraries reported that digital carriers were stored in archival boxes or library pamphlet boxes. There was a noticeable variation in approaches to housing maps associated with archival or manuscript collections. Approaches to managing this category of maps are reflected in the following summary statements:  Maps accompanying original materials (i.e. unpublished, manuscript materials) are housed with the related items.  Maps are separated to provide appropriate housing, with details of the separate digital and physical locations.  Maps are assessed case-by-case, and a single folded map may be allowed to stay with an archival collection if it is of low significance or if other copies are held in the maps collection.  Published maps that have not been annotated or marked are transferred from the archival collection to the map collection. If the map is hand-drawn or annotated it will be kept with the archival collection.  Archival and published collections maps are housed in separate sequences.  For TAHO, all archival items are in closed compactus as are legal deposit maps. There is a noticeable split between those libraries that apply barcodes to maps and those that do not. It was further specified that:  Archival, rare and significant maps are (generally) not barcoded directly.  Series maps, if not individually catalogued, may have a barcode for the entire series, attached to a folder.  Mixed practices – past practice barcodes were applied direct to the map, except for rare maps. Current procedure is to place maps in a folder and then place the barcode/s on the folder.  Barcode labels are applied only to the sleeves of maps or to the verso of maps that are calico backed. Recommendation Set up a subgroup to gather information on standard specifications for cabinets and storage methods including suppliers. This information would then be available for the NSLA Storage Management Group. Action Nominations required to participate in the working group.

10. Access to maps 10.1 Digitisation While most libraries have carried out some digitisation, there is considerable variation in terms of the ‘depth’ of map digitisation. Where digitisation has been carried out, it has been largely restricted to heritage or “rare” materials. The NLA has had a program since 2001, and has recently moved selectively into its twentieth century mapping, while SLNSW and SLV have more recently undertaken large volume programs of heritage materials. Where regular programs exist the percentage of total collection digitised was reported as less than 5%. Six libraries reported routine digitisation at some level, with the remainder indicating having completed small projects or having no digitisation of maps. Of those that carry out map digitisation regularly, nearly all use an image management system to upload, store and deliver their map images. The clear preference for maps is for a zoom tool to be added to a high resolution image for discovery purposes. Most libraries respond to demand for purchasing digital images of maps, while nearly all deliver to clients only via disk (ie only one reported making digital images available via digital upload/download or FTP options). Several libraries reported retaining images from client copying orders. As maps are often highly detailed documents, effective viewing and access requires some basic resolution standards and plug-ins. There was general understanding that delivering maps online would increasingly require optimization of panning and zooming and applications for mobile devices and touchscreens. It was suggested that use of a common approach to delivering or displaying images across NSLA libraries (ie via Trove) would simplify client access. This would be dependent on individual library IT environments, however some basic requirements such as resolution, the ability to pan and zoom, could be aspirational goals. Several libraries were challenged by clients wanting to use GIS-based software with existing digital images. Few surveyed possessed GIS literacy to access and show clients how to use maps online. 10.2 Onsite delivery models and requesting Libraries reported a mix of manual and ecallslip delivery methods. The majority of libraries reported delivery of maps ‘on demand’ or ‘multiple times daily’. For those libraries that reported some offsite storage of maps, turnaround time was generally 24 hours or greater. Most NSLA libraries have a supervised area for use of large formats if not maps per se. Most allow use of maps with other materials – only one respondent reported a maps-only reading room - with the general preference for an area where patrons consult a range of heritage materials: manuscripts, rare books, maps, hardcopy newspapers, pictorial etc. SLSA outlined its model for access as follows: Staff supervised reading room for all formats ; a staff member trained to undertake map enquiries is rostered on desk or on call for every Information Desk shift and can assist with map queries from customers using the reading room. Staff who undertake Maps research enquiries can also be called to advise/assist if available, and Desk staff can record a deferred enquiry in RefTracker for queries that cannot be resolved or completed during the desk shift. There was a mix of open and closed access to maps. One library reported its ‘general reference collection’ as open access, while the remaining materials were all closed access. SLWA indicated that its Western Australian maps are on closed access, while the non-WA maps are on open access. Others reported fully closed stacks, or sheet maps in closed stacks while there is open access to atlases and gazetteers. Most indicated some additional level of security required for heritage materials. Size was reported as an issue for some respondents, who identified the need for large tables as a requirement, which may not fit the space available for mixed materials. Use of digital cameras was reported universally. Two libraries indicated ‘specialist’ GIS software for using maps, and one has a graphic interface as an option for searching its collection. 14

Recommendation Libraries to share information on useful applications, particularly for mobile devices, enabling viewing options for digitized maps. Establish a working group to develop or share suitable guidelines on requirements and use of GIS with digitized collections. Action Members to place appropriate documents and links to tools in the shared NSLA project area. Nominations required to participate in the working group.

11. Professional development and communication 11.1 Staff development Map collections are commonly managed by one or two staff members who may also have other responsibilities. The survey and workshop discussions confirmed that Map collections and the development of staff working with Maps is not a high priority in most institutions. As funding is restricted there are few opportunities to attend conferences or workshops to develop any specialist knowledge or expertise. Working with other more experienced staff and informal mentoring is the primary way in which staff gain knowledge about the format and the library’s collections. Only four libraries responded that attendance at conferences was supported and non-attendance was generally attributed to a lack of time and funding. The responses to the following question reflect the range of concerns felt by NSLA map staff about staff development – ‘Do you have any particular concerns about professional development for map staff in NSLA libraries?’ They included:

 ‘My particular concern for professional development is geo-referencing expertise - and the need for map librarians to be able to put good practices in place for geo-referencing. It also seems to me that proficiency with mapping applications, including GIS literacy, is increasingly important not only to support discovery and delivery of mapping but also to enable library staff to implement and work with spatially enabled business tools’.  ‘Over the past few decades [my library] has relied on the expertise of several long-term and dedicated staff. I am not sure, in the future, whether newer and younger staff will remain in one position for this sort of duration; and it may well be that we are unable to build the level of knowledge of individual map collections as we have in the past. I suspect it will be more important to provide a level of online cataloguing, finding aids, and digitisation that will allow clients to access the material directly, and to promote greater knowledge of the collection across general reference staff.’  ‘Maps staff and cataloguers can be sidelined due to the specialist nature of the materials, and upward mobility through the organisation (or outside) may be limited. More mainstreaming and bringing other staff into the area is needed.’  ‘Professional Development generally will become increasingly less supported by management due to budget restrictions. In a regional area, such as ours, maintaining professional development is expensive. Professional Development opportunities need to become much more on-line for cost and time reasons. Digital mapping is becoming increasingly sophisticated and unable to be utilised or interpreted by staff without specialised mapping knowledge. Increased mentoring opportunities or job placement opportunities would assist here’. In most institutions there is only a small unit looking after map collections. This concentrates knowledge in one or two people which leads to issues around staff training and succession planning. It was agreed that general staff were not comfortable handling map inquiries and that there was a need to demystify the complexity of maps. A recurring theme at the workshop was the fear with which many staff, including supervisors, approached map material and map inquiries. It was agreed that while the value of maps as information sources was appreciated the complexity of locating material within a series, the variety of topographic

15 maps and the challenges of physical storage and arrangement often discouraged staff from engaging with the collections. 11.2 Formal education Only one staff member had a formal qualification in Geography and one staff member had attended an ESRI introductory course for ArcGIS. Relevant 'short' courses for Map Librarianship, cartography or GIS in libraries are unavailable in Australia. 11.3 Communication While social media may be used by the wider library only one library, SLNSW, used social media to promote and provide access to the map collections. SLNSW has supported a number of blogs, uses RSS feeds to promote new acquisitions and newly catalogued maps and uses #slnswmaps on twitter. Recommendation It was generally agreed that we need to actively promote the value of our map collections and play a more active role in demystifying this format for colleagues, researchers and the general public. Action Members to share successful programs and activities which promote and encourage the use of maps.

RECOMMENDATIONS A series of recommendations have been developed from the Maps survey: 1. Set up a subgroup to investigate statistics currently collected, analyse gaps and possible solutions. The group could also investigate the use of Reftracker to collect comparative statistics on inquiries. 2. The level of distributed collecting which already exists between institutions should be recognized as a strength. Project leaders to contribute project outcomes to the broader activities of the Collaborative Collections project group which manages The Australian Libraries Collaborative Collection (TALCC). 3. Identify and recommend implementation of the basic cataloguing elements required for maps including the most effective tool for the application of coordinates. Members to share spreadsheets and any other templates used for specific map cataloguing projects. 4. Brendan Whyte (NLA) to be approached to support a workshop on series cataloguing for NSLA members. 5. All libraries to use the processes identified through The Australian Libraries Collaborative Collection (TALCC) to develop a communication plan for dispersal of map materials across NSLA membership. 6. Members to share successful approaches to managing backlogs including templates for spreadsheets and programs for volunteers and students. 7. Develop an agreed position regarding acquisition of digital mapping including the deposit or provision of electronic links to mapping products that are publically accessible and which do not require specialist GIS software. Explore MOUs with government organisations producing digital mapping (perhaps initially with Geoscience Australia). This might include agreement to harvest all PDF products appropriate for each State /Territory from Geoscience Australia. 8. Develop or share suitable guides or presentations on the use of maps for Family History. 9. Gather information on standard specifications for cabinets and storage methods including suppliers and make available to the NSLA Storage Management Group. 10. Share information on useful applications for viewing digital maps particularly for mobile devices. 11. Promote the value of our map collections by sharing successful programs and activities which promote and encourage the use of maps and play a more active role in demystifying this format for colleagues, researchers and the general public.

Timeframe The following table documents the possible timeframes, and resourcing required for recommendations which require a working group or NSLA support. Following feedback from the NSLA CEOs each action will be scoped through a standard work package.

Recommendation Time frame Resources

Review of statistics including December to March Workgroup with participation Reftracker. 2013 from nominated members

Establish basic cataloguing December to March Workgroup with participation elements required for maps 2013 from nominated members cataloguing.

Tutorial on Series map March to June 2013 Financial support for Brendan cataloguing utilizing expertise to provide the training in a developed by Dr Brendan Whtye central library or in a series of workshops.

Develop an agreed position March to June 2013 Workgroup with participation regarding acquisition of digital from nominated members. mapping and explore MOUs with government organisations producing digital mapping (perhaps initially with Geoscience Australia). Refer to Digital Collecting Project.

Set up a subgroup to develop or July to October 2013 Workgroup with participation share suitable guides or from nominated members. presentations on the use of maps for Family History.

Gather information on standard March to June 2013 Workgroup with participation specifications for cabinets and from nominated members. storage methods including suppliers and make available to the NSLA Storage Management Group.

Establish a working group to March to June 2013 Workgroup with participation develop or share suitable from nominated members. guidelines on requirements and use of GIS with digitized collections.